Dr. Betty

Dear Guy: <BR> <BR>I'm wondering if when you said, "Some of you may criticize" you had any idea that you would get all of this. The responses here have been bothering me so I thought I would attempt to answer your question with some practical suggestions. <BR> <BR>1. The nature of your business... what is it? Who are the female counterparts that do what you do in the towns you will be visiting? If there is not a female equivalent, what is the likelihood that you would be interacting in a business way with women locally through the nature of your work. If there are such women that you anticipate interacting with from a business standpoint, why not write them a letter and let them know your interested in exploring the town and would be interested in spending time socially with them. <BR>2. If the above doesn't work, consider what philanthropic interests you have that have counterparts over there. Like art, music or history and contact the local agency indicating that you are interested in being a supporter. You could set up a time to meet with a representative of the group to talk about common interests. <BR>3. Since #2 may create a meeting with a man as opposed to a woman, you would have to use your discretion on asking your contact about female companionship. You could indicate that, if its music for example, are there any women that he knows of that would like to accomany you. If its art or history, does he know any local women that would want to show you around. That way, at least you have a contact who knows something about you and could pose an introduction. <BR>4. Lastly, here is a tried and true way of having a quality day and meeting potentially like-minded people wherever you are. Start the day by saying to yourself, this is the quality of experiences I want to live today, and proceed to visualize it to the best of your ability. Go do the things you visualize with an attitude of openness that you will discover or recognize a woman that want's to share that same time and quality with you. Remember, ATTITUDE is EVERYTHING. <BR>5. Along with that attitude be sure to include a smile, eye contact and honesty. <BR> <BR>Good Luck, <BR>Dr. Betty

Michelle

Actually, I think Guy has exactly the right idea. I love history and love travel - but it's unlikely you'd find me in alone in a bar waiting for someone to ask me to show him/her my home town! And, you do get a different view of a place when with a local. <BR> <BR>There is an organization (aimed I admit at female travellors) that puts you in touch with people (world-wide) who are willing to show visitors around their home town. Although it's aimed at FEMALE travellors I don't really see why a guy couldn't use organization too. Lastly, I've shown no end of people around my home town and have always enjoyed meeting people I wouldn't normally meet. The last person I showed around was from Yemen (a place I have never visited). We walked the walls, saw the cathedral, had a pub lunch and off he went to the next stop. No hassle, a nice day - what's wrong with that?????? <BR> <BR>As to Journeywomen, I've never used it, but it exists: <BR> <BR>Enter : Journeywomen <BR>next: HERmail.net <BR>Type in town and country <BR>If there is anyone registered who is willing to show visitors around, you type an e-mail which is forwarded to that person - from that point on ........ <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>

Webster

Yes, Joel, I'm quite wrinkled, and yes, I'm a lexicographer at times, although my proper "home" is CMOS, not MLA (which is a dastardly perversion of style, IMHO). (Some of your punctuation doesn't appear in either, however.) <BR> <BR>"Bemused" is commonly used as if it meant the same thing as "amused" -- with a twist of detached wonder. But classically "bemused" means dazed or confused, even to the point of being addled. The way you used "bemusement" -- which is not in any of my dictionaries but which I'm willing to accept as a decent coinage to mean the state of being bemused -- certainly suggested "amusement" -- as in, you were amused or entertained by what was said (and not dazed). But okay, maybe you were more confused than entertained. <BR> <BR>As to "jealous," that word describes a condition of protective fearfulness. If you had a rare coin someone else wanted, you would say you were jealous of it lest it be stolen -- but that is not the same as envy. In this case, it would be the someone else who is envious of your coin. <BR> <BR>But "jealous" also describes a condition of suspected rivalry, which is more what you had in mind in your comment, in that I think you meant "those _who_ are spiteful" might be envious of "Guy's"confident approach" (I doubt it) -- but "jealous" is _never, ever_ used with the preposition "for." <BR> <BR>Yes, language policing can be tedious, and language is always changing and growing according to how "real people" use it. So we lexicographers have to watch for adoptions that are going to stick -- "jealous" instead of "envious" is perfect example. But the reason we have dictionaries and editors is to try to keep communication from becoming completely chaotic. And the reason for any one person to observe proper usage is to keep from sounding ignorant and clumsy. <BR> <BR>The sermon for today is now over. Go in peace. <BR> <BR>You, too, Guy.

Joel

Nice reply, but let me give you something really good to tackle; I'm small potatoes. I propose to give you an opportunity to elevate yourself from what I assess as the futile and frustrating, albeit brave and noble, task of commenting on people's incorrect common usage (one person at a time), to nothing less than the heady role of pronouncement on the very evolution of an entire living language. Here goes. Grab onto your Strunk & White, sir or madam! <BR>I lived in France for a couple of years and became aware, bemused even, to witness the efforts of the Academie Francaise to both define and enforce a pure French language. More specifically, they try to fend off the americanisms and other isms that incessantly creep into the parlance. The people want to call a parking lot "le parking"; the Academie comes out with a pronouncement that, non, it is an "aire de stationnement". This, of course, is universally ignored by everyone but the government. All in all, the AF's efforts seem to be as effective as trying to stop the tide with a bucket; there are countless examples of how the AF tries to use their lofty credentials to dictate how the language will/will not grow. Inevitably (from what I could see) they fail. <BR>Now this is in marked contrast to Englisn, which is quite unregulated. It is of the people. Websters and all the rest take note of what the people are (literally) saying, and add the new words. <BR>I would say that, per your own comment, my use of bemusement has become a popular usage. But you might be seen as attempting to be the Academie Francaise here. So... <BR>differentiate for us please on the appropriateness of your action in an evolving English language? Are you in the AF camp or are you in your namesake's camp? Why? And feel free to make this as interesting as you possibly can.

Dr. Betty

Well, well, well! What have we here now? A couple of peacocks strutting their frontal lobes. I spent precious time outlining how Guy could gracefully introduce himself to the French female population and I have heard n'ary a thank you. Perhaphs Guy stopped checking out his post when he withdrew his question and now we are left with the War of the Words. Guess that's better than the War of the Sexes. Is there a winner somewhere that we can applaud? <BR> <BR>God Bless! <BR>Dr. Betty <BR> <BR>

s.fowler

Dr. Betty. I am disappointed..... <BR>Your suggestions are almost as antediluvian as the ones from the men. It is grossly inappropriate to hint at social desires in a professional context. As a matter of fact it verges on *yes* sexual harrassment/gender discrimination. Would he ask the same from the male colleagues abroad? [and before you flame me. This is one of my research areas. I know the law and the moral arguments. As in published.] You are as guilty as the rest with catering to whatever-his-handle-was-I-refuse-to-scroll's desire for bimbo/women-as-acquirable-object. <BR>*sigh* I thought better of you.

gluck

What troubles me about this question is that someone is looking for something, but specifies little about what they are prepared to give in return. Given that the arrangement is about friendship, is the poster prepared to pay the expenses of any outings? <BR> <BR>I confess I am also somewhat troubled by the poster's referring to himself as 'well educated' but requests the other person be of 'quality.' It is perhaps better to avoid value judgements such as 'quality' when referring to individuals, and stick to terms that are purely descriptive. Particularly when someone wishes to avoid criticism, as stated, they should avoid using terms that could be construed as critical. <BR> <BR>If the emphasis of the poster is on companionship, then stipulate this carefully. One might find a family consisting of an educated couple who would be curious to meet someone; why would these not qualify?

Dr. Betty

Dear God, what is this world coming to? Sally, we are all products of the cultures we grow up in and we're influenced by the language available to us. One of the suggestions here was...just stick with the computer if you want female companionship. Don't you think that people are losing the ability, or perhaps self-confidence, to make social contact with the opposite sex, in a "companionship" kind of way outside of culturally prescribed mechanisms like bars or computers? Whatever happened to spontaneity? Whatever happened to taking the pen in hand and writing a letter of introduction for yourself? Whatever happens beyond an initial introduction with 2 people is their own damned business. To extrapolate "sexual harassment" from Guy's question is beyond reason. We must come from very different worlds. Have you visited the Louvre lately or the Rodin Museum? It's blatant raw sexuality depicted in so many ways, under so many guises. Our sexuality is a fact of life and the French celebrate it. I don't take pleasure in "flaming" people as you say, nor do I enjoy seeing people flamed here. I find it very interesting how a "thread" unravels.

SharonM

Boy, what a thread... <BR> <BR>I was trying to think of an intellegent reply and, well, just couldn't get my thoughts together... <BR> <BR>Dr. B: I thought that was a well-thought-thru, very generous reply. <BR> <BR>So Guy... maybe check out some of the art openings, flea markets, etc... <BR> <BR>oops. forgot you didn't want to take time. Maybe you can do that in advance? <BR> <BR>I sure hope you're well-meaning...then I won't feel like an idiot... <BR>(haha?) <BR> <BR>Sharon.

Sue

I cannot believe I just wasted 10 minutes of my life reading this crap.

Michael

The number of smug Philistines on this board who seem to consider themselves some kinds of intellectuals or sophisticated world travellers will be the stuff of hilarity for future generations, if any fragments such as this are preserved, though of course for those of us who have to negotiate our way among them now both at home and abroad it is considerably less amusing. I should like to see more threads of this type, however, to get a better sense of how good it feels to be the possessor of time that is so precious and thoughts so correct and sublime that it is infuriating to be confronted with people who can offer nothing to them but sullying and degradation. But really, I do wonder what this love everybody seems to have for European art and history can be based upon, given that nearly every sexual act between male and female depicted or written about before 1500 or so either is a rape or would doubtless be one by the definitions of our lexicographers and published legal researchers and soccer moms, including those celebrated lovers Abelard and Heloise, who I believe was still under 18 at the time of her seduction. Doubtless some simpletons will infer that I am advocating rape as some wonderful thing, however, given that some have argued convincingly that romantic love as we understand it today did not enter Western consciousness until it was discovered in Languedoc in the 11th century, one would suspect that would-be sophisticates would be more aware of or interested in the manifold possibilities of feeling and the motives of action which exist in the human heart rather than dismissing such fundamental motives as absurdities beneath their contempt.

Jurgen

For goodness sake Dr.Betty, can't you spot basic irony when you see it?? <BR> <BR>I was not suggesting that a computer would be a good substitute for a relationship with the opposite sex. I was stating that because some people were so against such interaction, then they must be happy alone with their computers? <BR> <BR>I can't believe I had to explain that! <BR> <BR>Jurgen

s.fowler

<BR>My mistake. <BR>I both didn't speak precisely enough and I stupidly forgot that boards such as this do not lend themselves to nuanced conversations. <BR>I *should* have said _could potentially lead to a situation that could be seen as sexual harassment_. <BR>On the other hand. My post wasn't aimed at Guy. It was aimed at you. This is the sentence I found troubling: "let them know your interested in exploring the town and would be interested in spending time socially with them." Particularly the last part. *Yes* there are different cultures out there. AND that last part puts a non job-related expectation into the situation. <BR> <BR>So Dr. B. You flamed the right person.

Can T. Resist

Guy, if you're still reading, imagine this: <BR> <BR>A woman in her late 40s comes to your town. On a telephone pole, she posts a note asking for a gentleman of quality to show her around. Would you put your life on hold to play Sacajawea to some stranger? <BR> <BR>My suggestion: Use the time-honored technique. Stand at a busy intersection with a copy of anything by Victor Hugo under one arm and an open guidebook in your hands, looking helpless in a charming American way. If the deity intended for you to receive female companionship, it will be provided unto you.

Tongue Tied

Joel, Can't you just admit when you are wrong? <BR> <BR>This is all so bemusing that I am envious of all of the big brains out there <BR> <BR>How'd I do?

007

Guy: I think I dated you in the late '80s. Only then you called yourself "Randy." You were 36, drove a Corvette, grew up in central Wisconsin -- and seemed to think that nice-looking women should be attracted to you. <BR> <BR>At the time it was painful that you didn't seem to want to be seen in public with me, but as they say, "Living well is the best revenge." <BR>

Joel

Tongue-tied, <BR>Sure,I can admit when I'm wrong. I was wrong and checked the dictionary to verify it. But when I read Webster's posting which so carefully set about to politely correct my grammar the image that came to my mind was of this person spending his/her time on the internet correcting the grammar of the world one person at a time. It reminded me of a film I saw once of a man who spent his life throughing the starfish that washed up on the beach back into the ocean. Where do you stop? I truly didn't mind the correction because I realized he was pretty astute, but where does he stop? I'm melodramatic maybe, but it seemed a bit sad. He was so serious about it, or so it seemed to me. So I asked him a more serious quesiton and the question was not at all meant to mock him. It was meant to solitit his opinion about what I think is the silliness of the Academie Francaise trying to legislate language. <BR>C'est tout.

have to

No Jurgen, you did not make an ironic statement. You were sarcastic. Big, big difference. Irony is a literary device in which the expected results are quite different from what actually occurs. Sarcasm is used to make the victim the butt of contempt or riducule. <BR>Dispite what pop culture and casual language implies, the two are not interchangeable.

Guy

To one and all, I had not intended to return to this string, but when I saw the number of postings I was shocked. I don't think there's anything I can say that will convince the half of you that think ill of me that I enjoy and respect women. I have women friends that I am close to and even exchange letters with a girl I went to high school with. <BR>I was nervous about writing the original posting and worded the header really badly, I readily admit. It makes me wince now. <BR>My trip is going to be intensive. The company wants a return on my expenses so we have meetings booked all day every day except weekends. There is little time to try to meet women in the usual ways because the odds against success suggest that I'd be at it a long time before being successful. Anyway, I hate trying to pick up women in a bar. The chances of such a woman also being one that would enjoy me or that I would enjoy is another problem. I would have preferred, therefore, an "arranged" meeting with a person of a similar eductational background in the interests of compatibility. <BR>I supposed that the chances of finding some sort of lead at Fodors was slim, but I have time to do it and to follow up while I'm here in the States so why not? The worse that could happen would be that it just wouldn't work. <BR>As it worked out I have reconnected with a woman I once knew, as I reported to you a few days ago. <BR>Not too much else to say.

Mike Murphy

Guy, <BR>Glad you found a solution. <BR> <BR>Hope everyone learned something from this thread and yes some of it *was* travel related...the *travellers* know what I mean; the *tourists*, well they might have, if they opened their eyes a bit. <BR>