"I Love (and hate) Dating Russian Men"

[Misha]

C'mon Misha, quit reading what you want to be there and instead, read whats there.  Sure she could have went to the local biker bar or redneck joint and got the same juices flowing that she did with the ruffians in Russia. But then, it wouldn't have been that much of a read, especially here. Would it?

Overall, she seems to be comparing men from very different socioeconomic backgrounds and then using distinctions to generalize about entire populations, the same mistake that men often comparing RW and AW IMVHO. However, continuing to read between the lines, it seems that she really wants to demonstrate that she is not a real feminist even though she certainly majored in women's studies at her university that she describes as feminist.

[Gator]

I agree with everyone who had something good to say about Diana.  She wrote an interesting article, largely consistent with what RW have expressed to me:
 
-  RM turn dating into a theatrical production, albeit predictable, while I lean towards spontaneity.
 
-  RM are more attentive and treat a woman as his property, while I have been trained by independent competent women.
 
-  RM tend to drink too much and some can become vulgar and repulsive.
 
-  RM are more forceful in bed, and there are many women who like it a little rough although that is not my cup of tea.   Nevertheless, it only seems kinky the first time.   
 
-  RM are fast in bed, and while that is not my cup of tea,  the impromptu quickie can be wonderful.
 
In summary, I learned to be more attentive with RW, largely because they want it and appreciate it with gratitude.  With regard to being patriarchal, I am attracted to strong independent women so I rarely could be domineering if that were my nature.  While I choose to stand and fight the important battles with RW, I frequently find myself saying "Yes, darling" for the little issues.    And sex is one part of the compatibility equation.  No one is perfect, yet many are good enough if not ideal. 

[Faux Pas]

GQ
There was nothing scientific, she made no outrageous claims and simply wrote about her experience and opinion. I couldn't tell if the article was for one of the rags she works for or just for her own personal amusement for her blog. It is insightful in regards to her being an AW with a Russian background from the mind of today's 20 somethings. I thought it was open and fresh. Again, she's in her early-mid 20's. Do you really expect to grasp it from her POV? Was her group stereo typing reaching any heights that isn't parroted on these boards ad nausea on a daily basis?. I liked it, I liked her attitude and her style. If I were 20 years younger she wouldn't be my type but, I'd enjoy hanging out with her. No means yes, yes means anal line was classic 

[Faux Pas]

Overall, she seems to be comparing men from very different socioeconomic backgrounds and then using distinctions to generalize about entire populations, the same mistake that men often comparing RW and AW IMVHO. However, continuing to read between the lines, it seems that she really wants to demonstrate that she is not a real feminist even though she certainly majored in women's studies at her university that she describes as feminist.

Sounds like your pissed off because she's an AW that claims to be a feminist or, that that she half way denies being one? Yes, she over generalized comparisons. The average reader of that article isn't as sensitive as you (or most at RWD) toward this particular generalization and neither is she. The reading between the lines thing is really out there Misha. Don't read something that isn't there just for the sake of fodder on the boards. It makes you look foolish

[lordtiberius]

yeah.  No one is arguing against her central thesis: Russians are from Mars and the Westies are man-ginas. 

This thread has been focused on periphery issues rather than the meat of ideas which do have implications.  But whatever, what came first?  The artist or the troll? 

[Misha]

Sounds like your pissed off because she's an AW that claims to be a feminist or, that that she half way denies being one?

Why should I be pissed off? I am just providing my interpretation. Though, I will question your need to project emotion onto others.

The reading between the lines thing is really out there Misha. Don't read something that isn't there just for the sake of fodder on the boards. It makes you look foolish

It is a forum, reading between the lines is par for the course is it not  You have your interpretation, I have mine. Though, I do try to refrain from calling others foolish.

[Faux Pas]

Why should I be pissed off? I am just providing my interpretation. Though, I will question your need to project emotion onto others.

Yeah I was wondering that myself. Your reaction to the article is certainly negative and comes across as angry

It is a forum, reading between the lines is par for the course is it not  You have your interpretation, I have mine. Though, I do try to refrain from calling others foolish.

Certainly for a forum, it is par for the course. Especially, if you want to look foolish. I can read between the lines of your more recent posts. I can see you were very insecure as a child. You never got your pony, you wet the bed and had no friends. These disappointments have followed you into adulthood where you have overwhelming urges to be humiliated, you have bad credit and are afraid of crowds but, the bed wetting had abated, somewhat.

See how that works? 

Who looks more foolish, you are I?

[lordtiberius]

low blow

agree with your opinion, not the insults.

[Faux Pas]

low blow

agree with your opinion, not the insults.

Wasn't an insult, just merely an example. It's hypothetical and untrue

[lordtiberius]

You asked a question.  I answered it.

I dont agree with Miaha, but he never name calls or disrespects.  That is a boss man card in my book.

[GQBlues]

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, FP.
 
IMHO, Diana's nothing more than a confused twenty-something brat that was far too sheltered and was deprived the social freedom to venture out of her comfortable pampered enclave and tweet her t**t.
 
A couple of rough roll with a biker dude, she would've written about the very same garbage she wrote with the exception *Russian man* being changed to the *the US Sons of Anarchy*. That pretty much sums up her diatribe. Comparartively speaking of course.
 
Isn't it widely known in the US that every girl have idealistic dreams of the perfect man, but always seem to f**k the first badboy that rolls along? So again, I found no revelation in her silly story. She's just having fun sowing her wild oats. I'll give her that. You go girl! Bang the drum, baby!
 
It's nothing more than a laughable female version of the MOB's fora trip reports. Dudes who can't at home, gets to free willy abroad. Then all of the sudden they're kissing everything Lenin.
 

[Faux Pas]

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, FP.
 

We have before and can again.    She hasn't written any piece of literary work here. Just a blog describing her experiences *shrugs*

IMHO, Diana's nothing more than a confused twenty-something brat that was far too sheltered and was deprived the social freedom to venture out of her comfortable pampered enclave and tweet her t**t.
 
A couple of rough roll with a biker dude, she would've written about the very same garbage she wrote with the exception *Russian man* being changed to the *the US Sons of Anarchy*. That pretty much sums up her diatribe. Comparartively speaking of course.
 
Isn't it widely known in the US that every girl have idealistic dreams of the perfect man, but always seem to f**k the first badboy that rolls along? So again, I found no revelation in her silly story. She's just having fun sowing her wild oats. I'll give her that. You go girl! Bang the drum, baby!
 
It's nothing more than a laughable female version of the MOB's fora trip reports. Dudes who can't at home, gets to free willy abroad. Then all of the sudden they're kissing everything Lenin.

I can agree with about all of this. Her story isn't much different than TR's we see on the boards. What I don't really "get" is the heavy criticism. Her trips to Russia are much like most TRs as that they are vacations, too. She's not much more than a kid. I can believe this is the world as she views it from her cushy perch on the lower East side.

[missAmeno]

Actually she described very well one particular stereotype of FSUM. You liked it or not is absolutely irrelevant. She is correct in her observations. That stereotype does not represent all FSUM or even majority but is common nevertheless. It is obvious that she is attracted (or have been attracted at a time of writing) to that particular FSUM stereotype and more likely that is because for her those FSUM are significantly different from western guys. Again do you like it or not, do you agree with it or not is irrelevant. Of course I can be totally wrong and you guys have been in relationships, been dating and been intimate with FSUM and WM. So if that is the case don't be shy and share your experiences. 

[ML]

Of course I can be totally wrong and you guys have been in relationships, been dating and been intimate with FSUM and WM. So if that is the case don't be shy and share your experiences. 

Hey; the guys asked me not to talk about our intimacies; so I won't.

[GQBlues]

Actually she described very well one particular stereotype of FSUM. You liked it or not is absolutely irrelevant. She is correct in her observations. That stereotype does not represent all FSUM or even majority but is common nevertheless. It is obvious that she is attracted (or have been attracted at a time of writing) to that particular FSUM stereotype and more likely that is because for her those FSUM are significantly different from western guys. Again do you like it or not, do you agree with it or not is irrelevant. Of course I can be totally wrong and you guys have been in relationships, been dating and been intimate with FSUM and WM. So if that is the case don't be shy and share your experiences. 

That may well be, and I'd leave that portion amongst you FSUers. But her accounting of American men is seriously lacking. Thus, my point that her 'entire' blog article is misleading at best, and rubbish at worst.
 
FTR - 'Sex in the City' is hardly representative of the US social/dating scene either. It's a parody of 'some' social sector created strictly for entertainment purposes. It doesn't, and never had, made claims it is universally representative of the social stream in the US. In case some may not have recognize the intent and the presentation of the production.

[Gator]

Actually she described very well one particular stereotype of FSUM. You liked it or not is absolutely irrelevant. She is correct in her observations. That stereotype does not represent all FSUM or even majority but is common nevertheless.

Exactly.
 
 

It doesn't, and never had, made claims it is universally representative of the social stream in the US.

There is no universal stereotype of AW, RW, AM or RM.  We are all different.  Nevertheless, Diana's article does offer a decent read about general RM mentality and to a less extent RW mentality.
 
A newbie should recognize that the RW he will meet have been "trained" by RM.   Reading Diana's article will help him understand how a RW appreciates being treated as very special.  They expect and appreciate an attentive man who knows what to do and does it. 
 
I do not suggest that an AM should start a fight with a local RM.   Some of these RM know how to fight and would have no reservations about kicking your face.
 
There is something about fighting and women.  In my adult life I have been in two fights.  The less serious one occurred in a singles bar in Palm Beach while I was on a business trip.  I had  met three young women - two sisters sitting on my right, and their friend on my left.  I was chatting mostly with the sisters. 
 
A man walks in and sits next to the third woman.  I continue talking with the sisters.  I hear a whack,   the sisters flinch and stare at the third woman.  I turn and see that she is holding her bleeding mouth where the man hit her. 
 
I raised my open left hand to say "Stop" when the man jumped at me from across the table.  He grabbed the front of my shirt.  It was a fine shirt and ripped easily,  making him lose his balance.  Instinctively I pushed him hard to the ground, and held him down.  A bar bouncer grabbed me, which freed the aggressor who came up swinging.  He missed me, and all the bouncers turned on him.  It took a minute or so to throw him out while I just looked. 
 
The sisters were all over me after that.  One sister took her injured friend home and the other sister went to my hotel room to change my shirt, where she stayed until the morning.  She was not a trashy woman, but a professional sales rep for a pharmaceutical company. 

[lonedrake]

GQ,

 Why not just show the article to your wife? I would like to hear her opinion of the article. I am no expert on dating Russian men....and neither are you.

[missAmeno]

But her accounting of American men is seriously lacking. Thus, my point that her 'entire' blog article is misleading at best, and rubbish at worst.
 

I can not really understand why so many guys do not like her observations about American men. So I decided to select every single quote of hers about them and hopefully you guys can point out where exactly is she wrong.

So...

Do you disagree with this?

Having grown up in New York, I had taken for granted that people were always striving for something, or at least striving to be striving for something

Or this?

While all men like a challenge, the average American man tends to stop pursuit once you indicate that you are repulsed by his presence.

Or this is what caused to criticize her article?

While I am all for slow, sensual, Barry White lovemaking, there comes a point with a sweet and simple Westerner when all the “Do you need a pillow?” “Does that hurt” “Would you like a glass of water?” questioning makes me wants to scream.

Oh wait wait perhaps this one?

In Russia, having a man pay for you obligates you to absolutely nothing, just as having him walk you home means absolutely nothing (Note: the latter is not the case in England). It’s just him doing what he needs to do, as a man, to take care of you, a woman. And before you start crying out sexism, what’s worse? To pay for a woman because women are less economically advantaged, or to pay for a woman’s meal and believe it entitles you to sex, as so many men do in the West?

May be it is this quote that you disagreeing with?

I get offended when I go on a “date” with an American guy, and after nothing but sterile conversation and hanging out for a few hours, he lunges at my face like a pre-pubescent.

Don't be shy.   If you have been kissed by American guy share your experience. I say honestly I do not have such experience and therefore have no idea if she is right or wrong in this observation. 

Is she so much off mark in this comment?

Here in the West, we may think we have it made with our “egalitarian system,” but when I look around at our hyper-individualized relationships, at our “you’re not obligated to anyone in any way” mentality, it seems brutal and barbaric

Or her observations in differences of viewing on living together by Russians and Westerners caused this reaction from you guys? May be it is her observations how Russians and Westerners look at cheating?

And the last quote mentioning American men ...

And still, sometimes, when I’m in my egalitarian relationship with an American guy, and I’m freezing my ass off in a mini-skirt outside while being eyeballed by some pervert and my boyfriend is giving me the “You’re an independent woman and you can handle this yourself” look, I can’t help but long for the protective paws of a Russian man, ...

Is it here were she has seriously screwed up opinion about American guys?

What did she say exactly about American men to cause such reaction? Can you, please, quote?

Because otherwise right now it looks like some simply reject idea of average Russian guy being more of patriarchal alpha than average American.

[Boethius]

The problem, missA, is lumping RM all into one category, and lumping AM all into one category.

My FSUM (an ethnic mix of non Russian and Russian, but culturally "Soviet") does not fit the stereotypes presented, nor, when I think of it, do many of the FSUM I have met, such as my nephew and his friends (to keep this to a younger generation).  Is the FSU more macho than Western societies?  Absolutely.  But it doesn't mean that FSUM are all such boors.  Similarly, the stereotypes of WM are equally silly.  I think that is all GQ is saying, or, at least, how I read what he was saying.

[missAmeno]

The problem, missA, is lumping RM all into one category, and lumping AM all into one category.

My FSUM (an ethnic mix of non Russian and Russian, but culturally "Soviet") does not fit the stereotypes presented, nor, when I think of it, do many of the FSUM I have met, such as my nephew and his friends (to keep this to a younger generation).  Is the FSU more macho than Western societies?  Absolutely.  But it doesn't mean that FSUM are all such boors.  Similarly, the stereotypes of WM are equally silly.  I think that is all GQ is saying, or, at least, how I read what he was saying.

Boethius, I do not lump anyone into anything 
As I said the author of article described one particular stereotype of FSUM. Nothing more than that.
I can not find in her article nothing too negative about American men. Russian guys received far more criticism than Westerns from her. So I just wonder what did she said exactly that caused such reaction from some members here. 



By the way on one point I do disagree with her.

In Russia, having a man pay for you obligates you to absolutely nothing

There is enough also of FSUM who suffer with expectations because they picked up a bill.

[Boethius]

I think she has stereotyped based on her own experiences.  And she is stereotyping all men, in both cultures, based on her own (limited) observations, much as men generally do on this forum, and as can observed on this very thread.


She stated that AM are wimps.  I believe the point is, she is dealing with a very limited segment of AM.  There are plenty of places in America where you can find a so called "alpha male" who will fight "for your honour" and claw you, if that's what you are looking for. 


I also think if she is teaching English, she should learn that there is no such thing as a "nape of the back".

[JayH]

I also think if she is teaching English, she should learn that there is no such thing as a "nape of the back".

Maybe she is teaching 21st Century English !!

Generalisations aside-- this has been a good thread of fair and reasonable comments which have all been interesting to read.

[Faux Pas]

I think she has stereotyped based on her own experiences.  And she is stereotyping all men, in both cultures, based on her own (limited) observations, much as men generally do on this forum, and as can observed on this very thread.


She stated that AM are wimps.  I believe the point is, she is dealing with a very limited segment of AM.  There are plenty of places in America where you can find a so called "alpha male" who will fight "for your honour" and claw you, if that's what you are looking for. 


I also think if she is teaching English, she should learn that there is no such thing as a "nape of the back".

I am amused that many have taken her essay as a stated fact. It was only her very limited experience. Am I the only one that sees this is a young woman attempting to sound like she has much experience to draw from but, when you peel the onion back a bit, she had very little. Around these parts they call that "All hat and no cattle" 

It is pretty easy to surmise the metro type male she is accustomed to in the U.S. . The chic group of up and comers on the Lower East side. GQ was right in that she could have went 30 blocks from her house in any direction and found her an AM that would have treated her much the same way as the RM. The differences she noted, really aren't cultural or nationality differences. Bruk has made the same mistake so many newbies make on this forum.

[missAmeno]

It is pretty easy to surmise the metro type male she is accustomed to in the U.S. . The chic group of up and comers on the Lower East side. GQ was right in that she could have went 30 blocks from her house in any direction and found her an AM that would have treated her much the same way as the RM. The differences she noted, really aren't cultural or nationality differences.

Wait wait wait ... are you saying America is full of guys that bring flowers and gifts on the dates, act like they are boyfriend straight away on the date number one, do not accept 'no' for an answer and always pay for everything when they are with women? 
Or you mean America is full of guys who cheat, fight for every little reason and do not differentiate between relationship and sex? 

 
 

[Boethius]

I am amused that many have taken her essay as a stated fact. It was only her very limited experience. Am I the only one that sees this is a young woman attempting to sound like she has much experience to draw from but, when you peel the onion back a bit, she had very little. Around these parts they call that "All hat and no cattle" 

I don't disagree.  Plus, she has ambitions as a writer, and it is a provocative piece for Salon (where I first read it), and it has garnered criticism in the comments there, as well.

It is pretty easy to surmise the metro type male she is accustomed to in the U.S. . The chic group of up and comers on the Lower East side. GQ was right in that she could have went 30 blocks from her house in any direction and found her an AM that would have treated her much the same way as the RM. The differences she noted, really aren't cultural or nationality differences. Bruk has made the same mistake so many newbies make on this forum.

I agree with this as well.  Statements about "Russians are . . . " have as much validity as "Americans are . . . "    Does a Manhattanite represent America?  Or an Alaskan?  A Hawaiin?   How about the "quiver movement"?

I think the only things Americans may universally agree on is their view of the effectiveness of Congress.