"I Love (and hate) Dating Russian Men"

[mendeleyev]

While I am all for slow, sensual, Barry White lovemaking,

Aloe, at my age I just enjoy listening to Barry White. 

[vwrw]

You should visit Russia today. I have just come back after a few weeks. Religion and superstitions are taking over, all my girlfriends from the past talk about is a) religious beliefs, b) children, c) death, d) health care (by means of new pharmaceuticals) to the point of nonsense, when popping pills is becoming a major hobby, and e) yes, it's true, miltiple husbands. By her 30 an average woman is on her third husband, let's call him a boyfriend. What a yawn. I much better prefer a company of men. At least they are interested in a thing or two.

And the type of ads you see on TV is kinda revolting, not something you can call a manifestation of equality. But they are supposed to reach the broader masses, so they show what the society is like exactly.

I visit Russia once each two years. I was there last summer.


I noted many changes in people's attitude toward traditional gender roles and the way they dress and groom themselves.


Two changes that especially surprised me were 1. the trend to marring young men (90% of marriages that occurred among my acquaintances involved older women and younger men) and 2. guys' request for introduction (before only girls were asking me to introduce them to guys and they were willing to close their eyes of some shortcoming of the men. Now the situation is to the contrary - guys asked if I knew somebody that would like to meet a man, and when I hinted to my single friends about the men, they were rejected without even a proper evaluation.

[vwrw]

Gator, knowing that you are picky , I doubt the RW you met were representative of the general population.
[/size]Looking at the RW I met in the dating agency,  those that I convinced to joined international dating, and those I met in US, I am inclined to think that RW seeking WM differ in the characteristics they possess. Not all of them are intelligent, pretty, personable, and independent.  Many of them wanted stable partnership for upbringing children much more than they cared about the business environment of their prospective new residency.
 [/size] However, let's talk about the women you described....I do not see how it is possible that women like those could enjoy being appreciated as a baby-factory only as if they were hens that we appreciate for eggs. Women like those have so much to offer. They want to be appreciate for their ideas, creativity, persistence in achieving goals and their accomplishments.

[/size][size=78%]Another point.  I dated older RW (average age of 40).  Almost all had experience with Western men.  Is this typical with the general population of RW?[/size]
 
For sure, yet I believe that RM are better than AM at doing the little things to make a RW feel precious and valuable (or at least RM are better than me  ).   Keep in mind that RW have been trained by RM in a Russian culture. 
 

No, I do not think that the majority of RW over 40 or otherwise have any significant  experience interacting with WM.

 Gator, I have to disagree here. First, RM are trained by RW, not vice versa. Mostly, women are the care takers, teachers and disciplinarians of children in Russian culture. So they make a huge contribution in what sorts of men Russia has.
 
 I certainly disagree that RM are better than AM at doing the little things to make a RW feel precious and valuable. RM might be more generous with gifts and better at understanding Russian culturally based humor - AM are better at everything else. If I had to generalize, I would say that AM makes a queen out of his wife, RM makes his woman work so hard that even horses look back on them and wonder how it could be possible to work  that hard.

[GQBlues]

I suggested thread to be a sticky and you just demonstrated you have reading comprehension issues.

I just couldn't be bothered to actually go back and read the immediate responses on the first page. So shoot me. But yes, YOU, by *actual post content*, is the ONLY one who *directly stated* it should be made a sticky. I take that because you fully believe, and can fully relate to, the entire FSU-based content of the article, yes? Then I certainly wouldn't doubt your full support of her FSU-based description. After all, we are all products of our environment, yes?

The fact there seem to be a seemingly larger majority (relative to the opinions gathered within this thread so far) of FSU folks who disagree with what she wrote, suggests to me that those folks are also products of *their* respective FSU environment.

That's in large part why I thought the article is/was garbage to begin with. Based solely on the content of Diana's accounting of the US-based social makeshift, of which I am a product of.

Hence, in conclusion, every individual's personal background, like yours and mine, actually play a huge part on how her article is taken. We either can relate or we cannot....So, I can dig that, eh...

Here's hoping you don't suffer from reading comprehension issues like I did now 

[GQBlues]

Exactly right. There are still those types in the US, they're your everyday PWs. The type of patronizing men who'll say and do anything despite themselves just for the opportunity to get laid.

A lot like the men in the MOB.

Isn't it getting more difficult to paddle the grand vessel named * I'm not your grandfathers   MOber* up stream?


See your TV appearance for proof?


Common' GQ ,that's getting to be some funny stuff right there.
 

Um---u r being a bit 2 cryptic there AJ...

I say *patronizing* - you say *paddle a grand vessel* *grandfather* *MOBers stream* TV appearance for proof* *common* *funny stuff*

er, can you offer a bit of clarity with your response please? Don't be shy now...I just don't want to be accused of having silly reading comprehension issues again.

[Gator]

Two changes that especially surprised me were 1. the trend to marring young men (90% of marriages that occurred among my acquaintances involved older women and younger men) and 2. guys' request for introduction (before only girls were asking me to introduce them to guys and they were willing to close their eyes of some shortcoming of the men. Now the situation is to the contrary - guys asked if I knew somebody that would like to meet a man, and when I hinted to my single friends about the men, they were rejected without even a proper evaluation.

The world has turned upside down. 

[Jumper]

GQblues-
Yeah intentionally cryptic.
I dunno man, just seemed a trend the last year or so for you to distance yourself from anything MOB, at most every post.
Just seemed a funny irony,given the forum topic.

  I certainly agree with your reply above to MissA  that each persons background and personality will
alter how they see the article.

As far as the article, she is either sincere, which means just another confused New York chick,
or its a piece written mostly for reaction.
As a writer,either way,  mission accomplished.If she polished it up ,GQ might even have her write  a freelance piece.

[GQBlues]

GQblues-
Yeah intentionally cryptic.
I dunno man, just seemed a trend the last year or so for you to distance yourself from anything MOB, at most every post.
Just seemed a funny irony,given the forum topic....

You see how you are!?! 

Actually 'no'. It isn't a 'trend'...I guess more like a long overdue, previously oft-ignored fact-based assertion that *the majority* of MOBers are a bit on the social junk pile. Am I distancing myself to any of these yokes? You make that call as it doesn't bother me what you, or anyone, *think* about it.

As for me, I've met enough, and attended enough, of these AM/RW couple gatherings to compose my opinion....and nope, I didn't meet my wife in a supermarket either. Thank you very much! Yup. Even told that to TV Host Ms. Stumped, Mr&Mrs. AFA, Mr&Mrs. Face-of-Siberia, VAWA Victim #4 and all of America...

I respect her so much more than to say that, or any other way, than what reality really is/was for us. So, having said that, who do you really think is in denial or *distancing* themselves to the truth, eh?

 

...As far as the article, she is either sincere, which means just another confused New York chick, or its a piece written mostly for reaction....

Yeppers...and that's really all I'm saying to begin with. It's garbage. Then the chorus line started marching in.

[missAmeno]

I just couldn't be bothered to actually go back and read the immediate responses on the first page. So shoot me. But yes, YOU, by *actual post content*, is the ONLY one who *directly stated* it should be made a sticky. I take that because you fully believe, and can fully relate to, the entire FSU-based content of the article, yes? Then I certainly wouldn't doubt your full support of her FSU-based description. After all, we are all products of our environment, yes?

Once again you making some kind of conclusions on something you was unable to comprehend.

[GQBlues]

Once again you making some kind of conclusions on something you was unable to comprehend.

From the first page...

....What are your thoughts on anything in the article?

She is right in her observations.

Shimano makes one of the better shift gears around, you know. Pretty nice and smooth.

[Gator]

Isn't it getting more difficult to paddle the grand vessel named * I'm not your grandfathers   MOber* up stream?

 
 
It does seem that he is in a perpetual fit of pique.  Best to ignore it as most people seem to do. 

[Ooooops]

Ooops, thanks for catching that. I saw little in the article worth commenting on so missed that one. 

My pleasure. 

[Muzh]

Here is this article in russian with dozens of comments http://www.inosmi.ru/world/20130818/212019690.html#ixzz2d0hw8YoP
Reading these comments i'm ecstatic that i dont have to deal with RM anymore 

LMAO

You are starting to sound like many American men around here.

[missAmeno]

Shimano makes one of the better shift gears around, you know. Pretty nice and smooth.

I kind of was hoping I would not need to explain obvious but as you unable think even a bit I will be now wasting time explaining obvious things.

So from the beginning and in simple sentences in hope you will be able to comprehend this time.

Yes, I agree with with most of Diana's observations.

And yes, you are correct, each of us is a product of our environment including me, you and Diana. Diana's observations are based on her environment. Expecting anything else from a person in early 20s is indicates something wrong with your expectations rather than with her observations.

But are her observations are really that far away from observations of others. Let's have a look at what FSUW so far said in this thread.

FSUW comments:

Lilly stated 'good observation in details'.

Konfushus shared opinion of his wife about this article. His wife agreed with some of observation and disagreed with some also. Here is summary he made at the end:

My wife agrees that there are 'men like this' as in possessive, cheating, macho guys that will fight over you and maybe rough you up. The general stereotype is ok. When it gets to the specifics, a lot of the observations didn't ring true for her. She admits they might ring true for others. Not all Russians are the same.

Mies stated 'so true!'.

Fashionista made interesting comment:

This is just a blog post, nobody says it has to be a documentary. That is what writers do, they take little differences and blow them out of proportions.

Notice she didn't deny differences just pointed out that author exaggerated those differences to attract more attention. And I agree with her in this. I already stated earlier in this thread that Diana described one particular stereotype of FSUM. Would she have written article about different stereotype of FSUM differences would have been not that much noticeable.

vwrw disagreed with one of Diana's observation (at least that the only one she posted about).

"The second thing you’ll notice is that Russian men are patriarchal alpha males, .......This sense that they are obligated to look out for you, not because you’re weaker or feeble-minded, but because you — as the fountain from which life springs forth — are precious and valuable."

I disagree with this observations. RM perceive RW as easily replaceable mules  who will cook for them, clean for them, watch after their children while they -the men can be engaged in their secret business. Once the mule gets older or fatter, it is traded in for a better modal.

From my observation and experience, RM are eager to follow woman's lead and will accomplish whatever she wants while they are sexually attracted to her. Once the sexual attraction fades, they will accept her services listed above. Then, they will move on to a new woman.

Actually I can agree with both here. Diana is young and dating. She haven't been long enough dating FSUM. All what she have seen at this stage is courting and early days of relationships. And stereotype of FSUM she described will give the feeling of being looked after and being precious and valuable at those stages. If she continue dating/being in relationship with such guys one day she will come to the same conclusions as vwrw. Ones sexual attraction fades she won't be anymore the fountain from which life springs forth but either replaced by a new fountain or become a mule that cleans, cooks and looks after kids.

Aloe summarized comments of FSU men and women about same article on russian forum. Almost all guys comments have been off topic (which kind of not far from what being happening here). And FSUW comments are here:

1.  Ugh, what nonsense
2. Why nonsense? It is very possible...
3. Most of what the author considers a plus, is exactly what has always repulsed me in RM.
4. Ditto. Most things she praises repulse me. I wouldn't wanna see the men she describes next to me even in my worst nightmares.
5. I understand why the author is nostalgic about these "qualities". I'm nostalgic as well. For me personally it's better when he pulls you by the hair into bed rather than: "Would you like some water, dear? A pillow? It doesn't hurt does it? .. How's this for you?"

Aloe also indicated that she is also repulsed with FSUM qualities Diana outlined in her article and that she is happy she doesn't have to deal with FSUM.

So non of the FSUW here said Diana is totally of base in her observations. Some disagreed on some of the details or reasons behind such behavior but exactly views on those details and reasons based on our own environment and of course our age.
Diana is attracted now to that type of guys but the day when she gets tired and wont be able anymore tolerate such behavior is not that far away. I do understand why she is attracted to them right now tho. She is smitten by attention and persistence to win her over that FSUM are so good at courting stage. They are not afraid to display their feelings in public and make her feel as the only one forever. How many times even on this forum western guys stated that if FSUW is into you, you will know about it. Same with FSUM, if he is into you not just you but full world will know about it.

What I find quite funny is your reaction on Diana's article. You jumped on defense fence straight away. Article was classified as a garbage, Diana's upbringing, heritage and fluency of both russian and english languages was classified as 'lack the total experience or full exposure of both cultures' (can you even say one sentence in Russian correctly by yourself?) and Diana by herself was turned into sheltered brat.

You been repeatedly saying Diana is off in her observations about AM. I asked what exactly she said that was so off base and so far you didn't reply.

http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=16356.msg340935#msg340935

Perhaps instead of talking general nonsense you can come down for few minutes from your pedestal of 'my environment is superior than yours' and answer with which exactly of Diana's quotes about AM you disagree with and why.

Boethius pointed out that Diana by her article displayed AM as wimps. I for sure didn't read it that way. Actually I couldn't find much of criticism towards AM at all in that article. But funny thing in my classifications guys who resort to belittle woman for her look or age because they disagree with her  opinion are not that far away from cowards and wimps.

Oh and Mr. Comprehension Difficulty I didn't suggested to make this thread into sticky because it should be 'some sort of a MOB dating parable' but because it answer many questions guys who decide to pursue FSUW ask.  However I realize now that I overestimated mental capabilities of some.

[Boethius]

FTR, I don't think GQ has reading comprehension issues, nor was he the poster who introduced Ms Bruk's looks to the conversation. 

I think you have misinterpreted what GQ has posted.  His "beef" was not with Ms Bruk, but with the WM who are looking for that one "key" they believe will unlock all the "truths" of RW, rather than understanding that when you marry, you are not marrying a monolithic culture, but rather, an individual with her own perspectives, shaped by her own individual circumstances.  The former idea is evident in posts all over this forum, and as I have read GQ's posts over the years, I believe this idea of a universal "key" to understanding is something GQ rejects.  This view is no doubt coloured by my own experiences.  My better half mocks such perspectives, by asking "Do Canadians believe in ghosts?", "Do Canadians believe SUV's are better than trucks?"  "Do Canadians believe .  .  . "  Like GQ, his point is not to know the answer to these silly questions, but rather, to point out the stupidity and fruitlessness in attempting to "understand" someone by defining a person as part of a larger monolith, rather than knowing the soul that inhabits a particular body. 

The stereotypes Ms Bruk describes no doubt exist.  In the past, some were even the ideal.  My better half used to describe this particular stereotype, the "proletarian ideal", the "machismo" of FSUM.  He'd mockingly say "A man should have hands the size of frying pans, big, dirty square nails, and walk like an ape. "   "A man should smell like alcohol and tobacco."  "A man should not read books or think too much or too deeply."  (I could go on and on).  The point was that these were common stereotypes among the "working class" from his youth to the collapse of the USSR (and thereafter), just as John Wayne, followed by the Marlboro Man, Clint Eastwood, Bruce Willis, and Ted Danson (as Sam Malone)  were stereotypes of what a man should "aspire to" in Western societies.  It's a narrow layer, and in no way indicative of the whole society, nor can the society be distilled into such limited descriptions.  The attempt to find the elixir which will unlock the key to a particular woman's psyche is futile.  I think that is much of GQ's point.

BTW, I sent the article to 8 female relatives, all in Kyiv, 2 married, the rest single, all 30 or under. None grew up in "working class" families, and, not one believed the article represented UM of their acquaintance.  Then again, none grew up in families where the idea that a man who beats you loves you would have been considered as anything but perverse and vulgar, though certainly, they all know of the saying.  So, I think this is more of finding what you seek and conforming to stereotypes, rather than discovering a monolithic characterization of RM, or RW, for that matter.

[Ade]

FTR, I don't think GQ has reading comprehension issues, nor was he the poster who introduced Ms Bruk's looks to the conversation. 

I think you have misinterpreted what GQ has posted.  His "beef" was not with Ms Bruk, but with the WM who are looking for that one "key" they believe will unlock all the "truths" of RW, rather than understanding that when you marry, you are not marrying a monolithic culture, but rather, an individual with her own perspectives, shaped by her own individual circumstances.  The former idea is evident in posts all over this forum, and as I have read GQ's posts over the years, I believe this idea of a universal "key" to understanding is something GQ rejects.  This view is no doubt coloured by my own experiences.  My better half mocks such perspectives, by asking "Do Canadians believe in ghosts?", "Do Canadians believe SUV's are better than trucks?"  "Do Canadians believe .  .  . "  Like GQ, his point is not to know the answer to these silly questions, but rather, to point out the stupidity and fruitlessness in attempting to "understand" someone by defining a person as part of a larger monolith, rather than knowing the soul that inhabits a particular body. 

The stereotypes Ms Bruk describes no doubt exist.  In the past, some were even the ideal.  My better half used to describe this particular stereotype, the "proletarian ideal", the "machismo" of FSUM.  He'd mockingly say "A man should have hands the size of frying pans, big, dirty square nails, and walk like an ape. "   "A man should smell like alcohol and tobacco."  "A man should not read books or think too much or too deeply."  (I could go on and on).  The point was that these were common stereotypes among the "working class" from his youth to the collapse of the USSR (and thereafter), just as John Wayne, followed by the Marlboro Man, Clint Eastwood, Bruce Willis, and Ted Danson (as Sam Malone)  were stereotypes of what a man should "aspire to" in Western societies.  It's a narrow layer, and in no way indicative of the whole society, nor can the society be distilled into such limited descriptions.  The attempt to find the elixir which will unlock the key to a particular woman's psyche is futile.  I think that is much of GQ's point.

BTW, I sent the article to 8 female relatives, all in Kyiv, 2 married, the rest single, all 30 or under. None grew up in "working class" families, and, not one believed the article represented UM of their acquaintance.  Then again, none grew up in families where the idea that a man who beats you loves you would have been considered as anything but perverse and vulgar, though certainly, they all know of the saying.  So, I think this is more of finding what you seek and conforming to stereotypes, rather than discovering a monolithic characterization of RM, or RW, for that matter.

Many people like simplistic stereotypes; they are easier to live with. 

[missAmeno]

FTR, I don't think GQ has reading comprehension issues...

If he would read properly he would not try to imply something different into what others said.

... nor was he the poster who introduced Ms Bruk's looks to the conversation.

Poster who brought in Diana's look into conversation did so without malice or belittling her in any way. GQ on another hand was trying to judge Diana's and Berdy's look, trying to dismiss their observations based on their physical appearance and even tried to make connection between interest from FSUM to them (or even basic manners displayed towards women as in Berdy's case) and the fact they both are US citizens. All what it shows is very poor manners bordering with delusion of grandeur.

I think you have misinterpreted what GQ has posted.  His "beef" was not with Ms Bruk, but with the WM who are looking for that one "key" they believe will unlock all the "truths" of RW, rather than understanding that when you marry, you are not marrying a monolithic culture, but rather, an individual with her own perspectives, shaped by her own individual circumstances.  The former idea is evident in posts all over this forum, and as I have read GQ's posts over the years, I believe this idea of a universal "key" to understanding is something GQ rejects.  ...

Boethius, with all due respect but in my opinion someone who is against stereotyping and in support of understanding each individual and that individual's own perspective would have attempted to understand Diana's and Berdy's perspective instead of  trying to stereotype them by himself.

[GQBlues]

MissA-

While I must admit to flattery that you spend a great deal of your day yesterday to come up with that exhaustive post, devoted only to sexy ol' me, I will caution you  there's always a point of diminishing return with me. I get bored easy...

...and yes, chicks dig that about me.

You want a platform to better explain your point of view, have at it. It appears to me in reading your latest rant, you could've just posted a more efficient way of saying it...Here's a good example.

It's on the first page. Quoted below. Posted by the really sexy dude.  Page 1, Reply #18

... I hope some of you folks get to realize (soon) it isn't nationalities but individuals that separate us all....

*Hype* is the what feeds most of the problem in the MOB. It is the genesis that seeds all stigmas. Just as the stupidity cited in Diana's garbage, and that of Berk's silly basura; they are not any different than the silly little trip reports most of these MOBers write during their silly little wife-hunting chapters.

These men, instead of paying attention to the 'women', they instead pre-occupy themselves with the entire idea of them being *Russian*. It is undoubtedly the single, biggest DIVIDING line in each of these union, or any other cross-cultural marriages/relationship. UNLESS, the folks (men/women) start to realize the person behind the nationality is who they're married to, the marriage wouldn't blossom to its fullest potential.

It's gotten so bad, men are reduced to marrying women that shares a common language with as well/much as they do with their pet canine..

Do you not see how ridiculous things like this and Diana's silly article really are? Folks always search to find a sense of belonging but always seem to draw a line of separation within themselves.

It's flat-out stupid. In my VERY HUMBLE opinion, of course.

...and yes, that's another thing chicks really like about me. I'm humble.

[missAmeno]

MissA-

While I must admit to flattery that you spend a great deal of your day yesterday to come up with that exhaustive post, devoted only to sexy ol' me...
bla
bla
bla
... I'm humble.

So how often do you suffer from these delusional fantasies of omnipotence? 



By the way how in your concept fits that you by yourself decided to pursue Russian girl?

[GQBlues]

So how often do you suffer from these delusional fantasies of omnipotence? 

It's inherent. It came in the package of the Batman kit box

...


By the way how in your concept fits that you by yourself decided to pursue Russian girl?

Because she is the type of woman who isn't remotely like , nor can relate to the likes of Diana

[missAmeno]

Because she is the type of woman who isn't remotely like , nor can relate to the likes of Diana

You see you misunderstood again 

Not Why exactly her? but How come Russian?
Did you meet her accidentally in supermarket or you as rest of MOBer here suffered from *hype* of stereotyping all AW and FSUW and decided to seek wife from another side of globe?

[Boethius]

If he would read properly he would not try to imply something different into what others said.

And this is different from most every other poster on the forum, exactly, how?

Poster who brought in Diana's look into conversation did so without malice or belittling her in any way.

Right.  However, it was to point out that she was far above Western woman in looks, which no doubt, is what accounted for her success with RM.   

GQ on another hand was trying to judge Diana's and Berdy's look, trying to dismiss their observations based on their physical appearance and even tried to make connection between interest from FSUM to them (or even basic manners displayed towards women as in Berdy's case) and the fact they both are US citizens. All what it shows is very poor manners bordering with delusion of grandeur.

No, he agreed with other men posting here.  WRT Ms Berdy, I don't think the point was to belittle her looks, but rather, the comment that to get the attention of a RM, a woman must be beautiful.  Ms Berdy stated all the comments made to her were "nonsense", a sense of politeness and expression toward women that no longer exists in American culture.

Boethius, with all due respect but in my opinion someone who is against stereotyping and in support of understanding each individual and that individual's own perspective would have attempted to understand Diana's and Berdy's perspective instead of  trying to stereotype them by himself.

I don't think he stereotyped Ms Berdy.  I also think Ms Bruk stereotyped herself.

[GQBlues]

Read Reply#219

Do you not have an appointment with Somme drunken thugs right about now?

 

[missAmeno]

Read Reply#219

Reply#219 doesn't answer question I asked.

Do you not have an appointment with Somme drunken thugs right about now?

 

Stereotyping again?

[lordtiberius]

Why are you defending this loathsome twerp?  He has no argument so the beat he can do is insult and make strawman arguments.  Any where else he face would concave from all the male fist love, but in cyberspace , he is world leader pretend.

why defend that?