Women Advising Women

Though the De Greeks are usually the recipients of unstinted and expensive educations,
our thirst for knowledge remains unabated and in some circles it is, indeed, legendary.

Material things are as nought to us, we scoff at wealth, we do not seek prosperity and
knowledge is everything. Our position has always been to consider the lilies how they
grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like
one of these. Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have
storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the
fowls, we De Greeks ask ourselves?

Speaking of fowls, Brother Sabu Singh (http://hubpages.com/hub/What-I-Have-Learnt-

From-Birds) has covered the subject quite extensively and I shall refer to his superior
knowledge in due course.

Now in the spirit of this thirst for knowledge, I often visit sites where women are
generously offering advice to other women, usually about men. Being an ignorant
peasant from Cyprus, I often ask in these fora (not forums as erroneously referred to by
those without a basic knowledge of Latin grammar) what I think are relevant questions,
but unless I begin my questions with ebullient compliments about the wisdom and
intelligence of the authors concerned, I am ignored. My feelings are hurt, as I imagine
the tossing of the head that precedes the refusal of the authors to cast their pearls of
wisdom in the direction of male swine. Again, this is a classical reference which is due
to a liberal education funded by honest toil.

So I have decided to plagiarise. I shall put before you questions and answers I have
found on the Internet in the hope that all of us might benefit, for the good of human
relations and humanity in general.

One such specialist published a letter from Gladys, an advice seeking admirer with
statements and questions which cannot fail but create scientific interest in those
studying the female mind:

Gladys says that she has lived with her partner George for 6.5 glorious, loving,
wonderful years during which Gladys has had no interest in marriage. Or so she says
and here we may choose to believe her or otherwise, depending on our generosity of
spirit at the time the question is raised. Though not the marrying kind, three months into
their relationship our Gladys decided that he is “The One” but cruised along for all the
years under advisement without taking up the matter with George.

However, recently realisation has sunk in that all their friends have actually got married
and some are even contemplating solid investments for the education of their future
grandchildren. As soon as she broached the subject with George, however, for some
strange reason, George suddenly began to be unsure about the wisdom of such a drastic
commitment after only six-point-five-years of imitation conjugal bliss with Gladys. He
is not sure. He is confused. What is love in the greater scheme of things, the philosopher
George now asks.

Here, reading the text, one gets the impression that it is at this point that steel has crept
into the voice of our Gladys when she addresses George. The independent observer now
feels for George. One sees a George who has run out of excuses and apparently a
George who tries to come clean by finally telling Gladys clearly (“and honestly”)- the
brackets are Gladys’s not mine - that George has began to have doubts as to whether he
is in love.

Though to every single man reading this the situation is crystal clear, Gladys
disappointingly does not appear to be able to get the point, to grasp the situation and,
with a great deal of computer ink and tears, applies to our expert for advice on what to
do.

Regrettably for Gladys, the expert also fails to comprehend the clarity of the situation as
perceived by all of us here and requires 1284 words to respond. That’s how many words
our expert uses in reply, yet when I make a comment on her site she does not deign to
honour me (the “u” is deliberate, for the benefit of colonials) with even two words,
even if the first one was beginning with an “F”. For Gladys, though, our expert feels
that the sky is the limit and after 1284 words the gist of the advice is, and this is
verbatim:

“You need to seduce this man!”

I like Gladys. Her perseverance is admirable, though misplaced, so I shall try to

illustrate the situation for her in the hope that she will comprehend it as quickly as
possible and move on before her friends begin to invite her to the baptisms of their
grandchildren, introducing her to newcomers as their spinster friend.

For this purpose I shall call upon the superior knowledge of Brother Sabu Singh and his
world renowned treatise under the all encompassing title “What I Have Learnt From
Birds”.

I call upon Gladys to pay particular attention to the following paragraph and I
hope that Brother Sabu Singh shall not begrudge me the quotation:

QUOTE

The fidelity of the Sarus crane is legendary. In fact, the Mughal Emperor
Jahangir writes of the Sarus' lifelong bond in his opus Jahangirnama. On
the other hand, the promiscuity of the sage grouse, some sandpipers and
hummingbirds is well known. The Baya Weaver and its intricate nest tell a
fascinating story. The male builds a nest after which a number of females
inspect it. One of them finally approves and occupies the nest, and
copulation occurs. Subsequently the male builds another nest and repeats
the exercise with another lot of females

UNQUOTE

The bold lettering of the last sentence is mine, Gladys. My dear Gladys, we Sarus Crane
types look on the Sage Grouse and the Baya Weavers’ of this world with a raised
eyebrow and a justifiable feeling of superiority which can only be considered as
justifiable by any person of solid Christian morals. We frown on female Baya Weavers
who wish to inspect our worldly goods before opening their wings to us. Our pride will
not allow us to be enticed by their attractions, no matter how alluring (though in truth
we might occasionally make an exception in some particularly promising instances).

However, not all men are as we, Gladys. I am afraid that your George may have started
out as a Sarus Crane and might have remained so for, as you so aptly put it, 6.5 years,
but that was under completely different circumstances, to wit, they were 6.5 wonderful
years during which you did not insist on this strange proclivity you have recently
become a slave to, meaning this mania you have acquired to be taken down the aisle. In
fact your behaviour to date was more designed to ensure your being taken up the creek.

So I am afraid, Gladys, that the time has come for you to take a leaf out of the female
Baya Weaver’s book and start inspecting other potential nests, before it is too late.

And Gladys, before you go, please listen to the voice of mature male wisdom. When a
female expert on relationships tells you to “talk to your man” don’t believe her and do
not listen to her. She is speaking from the position of the woman and she is, in short,
speaking through her hat. We men do not want to listen, Gladys. Not in the sense that
your female experts would have you believe. We like to discuss literature and daily
events, but when you begin speaking of fashion, celebrities and your girlfriends, you
have lost us, Gladys, you poor fish.

Finally Glady, when a women speaks of falling in love with the spirituality of a man,
we know that in this case spirituality is a euphemism in the female mind. We know that
the spirituality of the male, as assessed by the female of the species, is directly related to
the number of multiple orgasms the male is able to provide the female over the long
term and the consistency is a crucial factor in the equation.
We note, Gladys, that it took you a test run of three months to decide that poor George
is “The One”. During this time you were assessing poor George’s spirituality and it
seems that our George has come up trumps. Good for George, the new Baya Weaver of
the brotherhood of man.