It sounds like every crush I ever had on a girl — which is markedly different from the way men usually decribe their passions to me. I’ve always thought of myself as more like a woman than a man — maybe I have girl crushes (with the added option of making a pass at the het ones).
I guarantee it isn’t just a girl thing. I had the male equivalent of the girl crush on my best friend back in the day, when we were both in high school. He was top in the class, football player (admittedly not all that good, but still), excellent actor, decent musician. I also have one on the lead guitarist/singer of the band Trivium. Gorgeous, young, plays like a god. Or, these could be expressions of my oneness (as opposed to zeroness) on the Kinsey scale…take your pick.
I get these all the time. I find that they happen much more frequently when I’m not feeling as confident and self assured as I normally do. And they serve good purpose in that way, too; usually the object of my crush is someone who inspires me to do better with my life. And more often than not, these crushes turn into fantastic friendships down the road.
I don’t want to deny the phenomenon, but I do find it interesting that the article asserts over and over again that these crushes are not at all sexual in nature (that sex and love are actually separate in the brain), that they are to do with women’s “nature” and “evolution,” but that men are simply not “reared to show their emotions.”
Ditto, Annie. I can think of a few girls who I’m friends with now that started off as ladder-climbing, self-improvement adulation.
They used to call them “smashes” decades ago. And of course they are sexual in nature. What surprises me is that in this supposedly lesbian/bisexual hip age, the author falls all over herself to say they aren’t. The conventional wisdom used to be that girls thrown together, such as in a girls’ school, had these crushes as a way of “trying out” the “important” feelings that would come when they met boys. And for most, I think that was/is the case. But who knows how much bisexuality has also been suppressed?
Yah know, I can’t help but agree with Sina here … I don’t deny that these things do exist, but a) I was a little put off by the homophobia in the emphatic “this isn’t sexual” repetition, and b) why do you need to use the word ‘crush’? I can’t help but feel in regards to the latter that it takes away yet another thing us that us queers have. It just feels like “hey, we’ll take THAT word away from you too”. Further, I also can’t help but feel that such things like this would be used to marginalise women that discover that they have real intimate feelings for another woman, particularly if they are discovering it later in life in their twenties and thirties; “Oh, you don’t have feelings for her, you just have a ‘girl crush'”. And finally, what’s with the “girl” shite? I mean, aren’t women in their 20’s and 30’s a touch beyond such infantalisations?
She really knows her stuff, and there’s something almost sexy about that,” Ms. Tyler said. “There’s just something really sexy and powerful.” so what is it, Tyler? almost sexy? or really sexy? i agree with Sara & Sina. the article seemed to revolve around the mantra of “IT’S NOT GAY!” maybe not – because, hey, the range of human experience is a wonderful & varied thing & there is no doubt more to it all than is dreamt of in our philosophies. but i’m willin to bet that, by the same token, this is all just evidence that most folks are queerer than they know (or care to admit). what’ll be the next big revelation? “girl sex”? didja hear that Lois & Harriet are sleeping together? but don’t worry. it’s just “girl sex”…
Remember, this is the newspaper that brought us such penetrating analysis as Jennifer 8. Lee’s piece on the “man date.” I wouldn’t take it too seriously. Also, is this really such a gendered phenomenon? I agree with RandomLiberal that it isn’t. I (a man) have at times had what you might well call non-sexualized (or, at least, not overtly sexualized) “infatuations” with other men “who may seem impossibly sophisticated, gifted, beautiful or accomplished.”
Jam – Trust me hon, the amount of ‘straight’ women that will jump into bed at the drop of a hat (or rather, a pint of beer) with another woman constantly amazes me. Of course, while they may love and enjoy romping with us queer women, they aren’t gonna fall in love with us, so maybe they are ‘straight’. But I definitely agree … the world is queerer than queer …
Sarah- they’ve even got their own how-to manual: The Straight Girl’s Guide to Sleeping with Chicks it’s described as being “ideal for any woman looking to spice things up with a boyfriend, break the ice with a best friend, or simply add a few just-in-case items to her sexual menu.”
I feel this way towards people (human and non-human), places, and other things that make me excited. To me, I believe it is the prospect of the experience that makes me want more. Whether that be an awesome mind, great atmosphere, or just a really cool gadget–it doesn’t matter. Is anyone shocked by feeling this way towards something? Or is it more of the acting upon those feelings that everyone is amazed at? Also, has anyone found themselves prohibiting these feelings based on some kind of circumstance?