Jekyll/Hyde

[jay]

A few realizations, today, largely unrelated.

For some combination of reasons, I've been depressed, almost despondent at times, since we got back Friday evening. And this has spun off my usual depression-parasitic reactions... increased insecurity, defiance, self-putdowns, clingyness. Strangely, my spirits were hugely lifted in a Krispy Kreme shop tonight when the counter guy handed me a warm doughnut... "you look like you could use this." Not on my waistline, perhaps, but that little act of kindness brought me out of a funk. Thankfully, my down periods rarely persist for more than a few days, and soon I'll be back at work (which tends to drag me out of a hole).

At work I feel in charge of myself, competent, capable and I have a track record of accomplishments. Self-confidence. I know my value, and can measure my past impact in a couple of fields. And I enjoy it -- I feel passionately about what I do, and learn. All of those things collude to bring me up and make me fully-functional again.

Personally or socially... I feel adrift, incompetent, and fairly unattractive. Like I have no accomplishments, and nothing much to offer personally. Left idle at home, or without positive external social reinforcement, I'll tend to damp down and gnaw on myself. And I'm not fishing for compliments here... I'm stating my mindset, whether or not it matches reality. One reason that I avoid planning a social calendar during the workweek is that subconsciously I associate it with this mindset. Brian-the-scientist doesn't want to think about turning back into Brian-the-geek, come Friday evening, or the possibilities for failure and rejection therein. Kind of a Jekyll/Hyde flip... and at the same time, I feel internally compelled to go out and find friends and be social. I can't just hide away until Monday morning.

Another realization, coming out of a 2-hour-long chat with my dear friend EA, is that my courting behaviors, manners, and attitudes are much closer to what girls are apparently taught than boys. I wait for the other person to make the first move. I dislike pursuing... I worry about harrassing or annoying women if I show much interest. I'd much rather wait until someone shows some signs of interest, then reciprocate. All of my five past-and-present sweeties kissed me first, probably after running out of patience (wry smile). patgreene claims that I moved first, but she's wrong ;-).

The same thing is true of casual touching... even with partners or close friends. I don't want to seem forward, or make the other person uncomfortable. I almost never reach for anyone. If someone takes my hand, fine, then I can safely assume that that level of touch is welcomed from then onward. But if I touch a woman who doesn't want my touch, I'm a bad person, a boor.

Even in the bedroom... I'm reluctant to be demanding or to impose anything on my partners... so I don't approach my partners unless they first seem interested themselves. Even if I'm really frustrated, myself. Unless I'm running out of time on an LDR visit... (reminisce).

Inculcated belief structure: approaching is aggressive. Aggression is bad...

EA's response was that she was confused, that these are things that women are often taught in this culture... and teasingly asked me what gender I was born ;-).

Comments

[who-is-she.livejournal.com]

ok, what you are talking about here is not being "feminine", but it's about avoiding rejection, and being very sensitive to other people's needs. Maybe TOO sensitive.

As Dawn points out, rather than completely wait for a partner's signal (and I as a female have found that the sort of signal men often need is not nearly as subtle as my usual signals. I usually have to hit them over the head with something heavy, or sharp)
:)
you could politely ask if 'this' or 'that' will be ok. THis is also a gift to that person... becuase it allows her/him to practice their boundary skills. They have to respond by saying "yes, a shoulder rub would be lovely!", or "no, that doesn't feel right at this time, but I'd like to sit and talk with you for awhile...". Giving them the opportunity to practice this skill with somone safe (becuase I think you feel like a safe guy...) is very valuable. Neither means you are being rejected: remember, whether someone wants to be touched is as much about THEM as it is about you, maybe more so.

Another thought I had was role playing: can you mutually agree with one of your existing partners that you will 'play' with the idea of you acting on your own authentic assertive/aggressive tendencies? IF done with parameters, safe words, etc... this could be safe but also allow you WITHIN PRE-ARRANGED BOUNDARIES to exercise a different side of yourself,.. the side you normally keep squelched out of fear.

Any of this helpful?
I don't know you well... but I certianly do empathize with the 'geek' mindset. I'm one too, ya know.
:)

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the discussion, it is useful and helpful for contemplation.

Being very sensitive to others is one of the best ways to avoid the worst rejections... seeing subtle clues and backing away before getting squashed. Not that it's foolproof...

I need a huge, obvious, unequivocal signal before I'll accept "go forward"... otherwise, I risk misinterpreting something unrelated and causing trouble. But the slightest implied negative signal is usually enough to keep me distant, rather than outstay my welcome.

Asking would be one way to reduce the risks, and hence bring the two extremes in reaction (positive/negative) closer to a single consistent reaction.

But... if one asks for something, and it is granted, one is then in that person's debt. If it isn't granted, then there are negative feelings on both sides. Neither of those are good outcomes.

someone wants to be touched is as much about THEM as it is about you, maybe more so

Maybe. If someone doesn't want to be touched by me in a hot tub, say, but then gladly accepts the same touch from someone else, then it *is* mostly about me. I saw that firsthand recently...
so to speak ;-).

can you mutually agree with one of your existing partners that you will 'play' with the idea of you acting on your own authentic assertive/aggressive tendencies?

Hmm... first, I have to deal with my reaction that all assertive/aggressive (or "overflirty" ;) behavior is bad and oppressive to others. It has been something that I've tried to control or suppress in my personal life, seeing it as a liability. And when I see another person being likewise assertive or aggressive, control my immediate impulse to judge that person negatively, without getting to know them or their circumstances.

At work, it's much less of a problem... there, I'm being assertive or aggressive on behalf of something else, so that other entity bears the moral burden. If my department sends me to battle for our budget, I can be overbearing, dominating and pushy if that's warranted -- because I'm an agent, of sorts, fighting for something or someone else. If the other agents get annoyed with me, they blame my department, not me personally. I'm just doing my job...

As far as role-playing goes, that's an excellent idea! Although impractical at the moment (my other partners are all LDRs). I'd need a local volunteer, over time.

One important point

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

But... if one asks for something, and it is granted, one is then in that person's debt. If it isn't granted, then there are negative feelings on both sides. Neither of those are good outcomes.

No, no, no, no, no! This is simply NOT so! This, I think, is one of the downsides of your Southern upbringing. The world is NOT a huge tally board. If one DEMANDS something and it is granted, then there is a debt incurred, by virtue of the force involved. But simply ASKING does NOT incur this debt, whether or not it is granted. By saying "yes" to an innocuous request like "may I rub your shoulders" the person is allowing you to give them a gift. YOU are the one giving the gift, of your time, your attention, the tension-release of the shoulder rub. You ALSO get a gift in return, of the human contact, and the ability to GIVE those gifts to the other person. It is a self-contained interaction. If both parties enter into it freely, no debt is incurred on either side.

By thinking of it as a debt-incurring situation you are making it be so, because the other person is aware (subliminally) of the imbalance in the equation, making it far LESS LIKELY that they will respond freely in kind. You must be willing to give the gift of yourself, freely, with no expectation of any return. Right now, this is NOT so. You give, but with the expectation of NEGATIVE return (that your gift is not a gift, but instead is a burden on them), which will make the other person uncomfortable.

There is more here, of course, but I must go do other morning stuff.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

one of the downsides of your Southern upbringing
Good point, probably valid, although Japanese culture wouldn't find it strange... gift etiquette reflects social status and obligation. But often recognizes what is, rather than creating it.

allowing you to give them a gift

This is a hard concept for me to grasp. If it's a gift, why do they not freely accept (rather than allow) it? Else if it's to my benefit, then "allow" makes sense. The concept of mutual, balanced benefit seems strange. Other than deal-making, say, again in a work context. Maybe it's driven by low self-esteem... I don't see what I'm giving to them as of value, so I don't expect them to value it, therefore imbalance and a debt incurred.

You give, but with the expectation of NEGATIVE return (that your gift is not a gift, but instead is a burden on them

I suppose that that's better than the expectation of positive return (i.e., that I'm a benefit to them and that they'll then owe me for my attentions). But neutral-return sounds smoother, albeit still a mental jump. I'd have to actually assume that other people liked my company, for instance ;-).

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

[one of the downsides of your Southern upbringing]
Good point, probably valid, although Japanese culture wouldn't find it strange...

No, they wouldn't. But you are living neither in Japan, nor in the US Southern states. Therefore, it's probably in your best interests to learn how to relate to the people you ARE living amongst.

If it's a gift, why do they not freely accept (rather than allow) it?

They could refuse. The options to a request (or in this case an offer) being Yes, No, or Counteroffer. I think you're seizing on the word "allow" a bit more literally than I meant it here, as well.


I don't see what I'm giving to them as of value, so I don't expect them to value it, therefore imbalance and a debt incurred.

Yes, exactly my point. You need to learn to better value yourself, and the things you have to offer. (She says, fully aware of the words "pot" "kettle" and "black" lurking in the back of her head!)


I'd have to actually assume that other people liked my company, for instance ;-).

Brian, do you have ANY IDEA how busy my schedule is? It's not as outside-impacted as yours, but it's pretty busy. If I wanted to go searching them out, I could probably line up lunch dates every day of the week (though then I wouldn't get anything else done). If I didn't enjoy your company, I ASSURE you I would not still be having lunch with you. It's not JUST because you take me to sushi, you know. ;^) I'm certainly not doing it simply because I "like a challenge" or am "taking pity on you" or anything silly like that. Yes, I think that there are things that I have to offer you, things that you could learn. Yes, I think that there are things about you that can be downright annoying. But those things are true in reverse as well--YOU have things to teach me, and *I* can be downright annoying! A good relationship--whether that's a love relationship, familial one, work relationship, or friendship--is based on a dance between the partners, on give-and-take, on mutual respect. You have a number of good qualities to offer that might make a person actually enjoy your company. (This sucking hole where your self-esteem should be, OTOH, is not one of them.) The moment you can convince yourself that you are good company, you will be.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Brian, do you have ANY IDEA how busy my schedule is?

Actually, I have some vague idea (from past conversations). And I have no doubt that, if you chose, you could line up lunch (and dinner ;) dates for every day of the week! I don't deserve your company... but neither do you deserve mine. None of us do, actually, we're all gifts to one another. IMO that's true for our partners, friends, and our children. Gifts without attached tallies or price tags. Or bills due ;).

And I have no doubt, intellectually, that I have many good qualities, things that would benefit others. The original comment ...actually assume that other people liked my company, for instance ;-). with a wink was a comment on the disconnect between what I think and my default reactions, and the difficulty of reprogramming them.

Re: One important point

[who-is-she.livejournal.com]

YES!!!
YES!!!

girlfriend... you ROCK!
:)

It takes some time and adjustment to think of things this way.
But it is very freeing.
Giving gifts is cool.... becuase sometimes it's something someone needs or can use... and sometimes it's not. Either way.. the gift is still a gift, still a valuable thing I can enjoy sharing when mutually agreed upon.

I have come very far from a place where I thought of these things like more of an incremental tallying system. I think you're right: others can feel it... the silent tallying of debt taking place.
and they RUN from that feeling.

I know I've had a few run from me.
heh.

Re: One important point

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

girlfriend... you ROCK!</i. *smile* Feeling's mutual, my dear. *hugs*

[who-is-she.livejournal.com]

"But... if one asks for something, and it is granted, one is then in that person's debt. If it isn't granted, then there are negative feelings on both sides. Neither of those are good outcomes. "

From this sentence... I feel expectations and I feel obligations. I think I don't make these kind of connections that you do... with 'debts'... and 'negative feelings'.

for instance: My June visit to Akien and Dawn's -- a friend of theirs asked if he could kiss me. I said "No, but I would like to give you a hug". So.. I didn't 'grant him what he asked for'. I don't believe there were any negative feelings. AND the reason I didn't kiss him was ENTIRELY my reason (that's my boundary with people I don't know well), not anything about him that was lacking. That interaction felt very pleasant, and through our negotiation we were able to find a level of connection that was comfortable to both of us.

"If someone doesn't want to be touched by me in a hot tub, say, but then gladly accepts the same touch from someone else, then it *is* mostly about me. I saw that firsthand recently...
so to speak ;-). "

ah-HA! no.. it STILL isn't about you! If you and me and Akien and Dawn were all in a hot tub..... it would be true that I would be accepting more touch from them than I would from you. Is that becuase ITS ALL ABOUT YOU?? Nope. It's becuase my boundaries (ME ME ME, not YOU) are based on how well I know someone. And I know them way better than I know you.

You can't assume that you know why people make the decisions they do. I totally understand the "it's all about me" mindset... as I have spent a lot of time there myself. I also appreciate your sincere sensitivity to wanting to be a good guy, not invade people's space or ask for things that are inappropriate. I guess I'm just feeling sad......that you seem to make a connection:

others' reluctance to invite or initiate or participate with you
is correlated with
how well you squelch your inner assertiveness or dominating energy.

Have you considered:
There may be those out there that would REVEL in your dominant, aggressive energy... given that you worked out your boundaries in advance. I really encourage you to work on that..(the role playing stuff... even LDRs can help with that..) becuase I believe that you might heave a real sigh of relief if YOU were able to express that part of you as well.

just my 2 cents.
:)

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

There may be those out there that would REVEL in your dominant, aggressive energy... given that you worked out your boundaries in advance.

Yes. What she said, Brian. At the risk of this being TMI, I will say that one of the things I value in a partner (especially a sexual partner) is the ability to dominate me with my permission, and within established boundaries. I am a strong person, and it takes a very strong person to truly "meet" me in this realm. It's not the ONLY thing I value (far from it), but it is an attractive quality for me. (NB: This alone could very well explain the lack of "spark" we discussed.) I'm CERTAIN that I'm not the only woman for whom this is so.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

You've already become for me somewhat of a test case in our casual interactions... I've already been more assertive and persistent there than with others. Baby steps... on the other hand, this means that once I work out how to be the same person socially that I am in other realms, you'll undoubtedly find me irresistable (given my other stellar qualities) ;^).

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

*LOL* Yes, I suppose that's possible! That should give you plenty of incentive, hmmm?

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Is that because ITS ALL ABOUT YOU?? Nope. It's because my boundaries (ME ME ME, not YOU) are based on how well I know someone.

This is eye-opening... You're right, I haven't accounted for changing personal boundaries or moods in my models of other people's behavior. I.e., different levels of acceptance or comfort, depending on *their* internal state at some given time. I've used a static model... either always accepting, or always rejecting, much more binary. And then the accept/reject decision would be theirs, according to how they saw me. And irrevocable afterwards, so choosing the best time and situation was critical. Maybe I'm not giving others enough credit...

If you and me and Akien and Dawn were all in a hot tub..... it would be true that I would be accepting more touch from them than I would from you.
In my usual social mindset, if I were in that hot tub situation, and if I wanted to offer a backrub, I'd probably politely hold back, possibly with the wistful-staring that dawnd mentioned. If I dared to risk offending you by *asking* you if you'd like one -- but then you nicely declined, because of your own internal boundaries about accepting touch from people you don't know as well -- then it is true that I'd then typically assume that it was about me, that you found the prospect of a backrub from me unpleasant, and I would probably afterward maintain even more distance (and not ask you again, even after we knew each other better, since I would already know the likely outcome). A static personal-response model, again...

If I used a dynamic model, I'd have to ask more frequently, since answers might change from time to time according to *your* internal views and boundaries. Which means in turn that I'd have to be comfortable that I wasn't unduly offending or bothering you by asking...

others' reluctance to invite or initiate or participate with you is correlated with how well you squelch your inner assertiveness or dominating energy.

Again, on the mark. In social space, I expect people to flee if I unleash that assertiveness or energy. So I try to suppress it and maintain a polite, considerate, low-key interface with others, hoping that that will allow me to hang out with them. But I'm much more likely to let that slip online than in-person.

There may be those out there that would REVEL in your dominant, aggressive energy... given that you worked out your boundaries in advance.

Hmmm... no, that hadn't occurred to me before this thread. It seems so alien (if I put myself in their place, I'd push back reflexively against someone else's aggressive energy) that it requires a large cognitive leap for me. I'm undoubtedly guilty of projecting my own highly-control-averse response on to those around me, and consequently denying them that energy from me (because I would expect a defensive reaction).

you might heave a real sigh of relief if YOU were able to express that

Probably... it would be a relief to be less personally squelched, less carefully-filtered, and more expressive and relaxed in social spaces. And to let others tell me their boundaries, instead of feeling like I need to carefully figure them out on my own, and to assume that anything in-bounds is OK.

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

...I haven't accounted for changing personal boundaries or moods in my models of other people's behavior. ...I've used a static model... more binary. And then the accept/reject decision would be theirs, according to how they saw me. And irrevocable afterwards, so choosing the best time and situation was critical. Maybe I'm not giving others enough credit...

I think you may not be. We are all mutable creatures. As a recovering B&W thinker myself, I know how hard it is to start seeing--and BEHAVING--in shades of grey. But it's worth it, not to be locked into these immutable places anymore.


Probably... it would be a relief to be less personally squelched, less carefully-filtered, and more expressive and relaxed in social spaces. And to let others tell me their boundaries, instead of feeling like I need to carefully figure them out on my own, and to assume that anything in-bounds is OK.

Try it some time. I think you may like it. When you DO try it, you might want to start with a small group, and let them know that you're trying an experiment. That way, if you do something totally out of character for you, they won't be all weirded out. But I suspect that folks won't really notice, other than to notice that you're suddenly easier to be around.

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

for instance: My June visit to Akien and Dawn's -- a friend of theirs asked if he could kiss me. I said "No, but I would like to give you a hug". So.. I didn't 'grant him what he asked for'. I don't believe there were any negative feelings. AND the reason I didn't kiss him was ENTIRELY my reason (that's my boundary with people I don't know well), not anything about him that was lacking. That interaction felt very pleasant, and through our negotiation we were able to find a level of connection that was comfortable to both of us.

And a lovely connection it was. I daresay it is an assertive introduction method, mustering the moxie to offer to introduce myself with a kiss. And I didn't take it at all personally that you declined, and I don't believe that we spent any attention on communicating what the boundary/headspace/preference/environmental background was for why you chose to decline my offer. But we did share a happy connection that I've been grateful for in the months since.

There'd definitely been no perception of rejection or lacking on my part from the encounter, and it hadn't occurred to me to think specifically on that particular exchange since. It was only in reading this comment today that I was reminded that we'd shared that particular negotiation result. I remember instead that we shared a happy bit of time, space, and connection - some of it actively with one another, and lots of it merely in comfortable proximity sharing the feeling of that day's community.

[who-is-she.livejournal.com]

(smile)
*waves*
Hi there!
nice to see you again.
!!!!
I'm glad you felt completely positive about our interaction. I did too.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Did you talk about your boundaries, after declining the kiss?

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

an assertive introduction method, mustering the moxie to offer to introduce myself with a kiss.

Hmmm... true. If I'd been nearby, I would have winced, averted my gaze, and probably avoided making eye contact with either of you for the remainder of the evening.

I don't believe that we spent any attention on communicating what the boundary/headspace/preference/environmental background was

Without communications, then... how would you have known to not take it as a personal reflection?

And then there's the receptivity-gauge... a woman that was OK with that assertive introduction method would conversely probably miss out on me altogether, as I'd figure that anyone whose boundaries were that permissive probably wouldn't work out as a friend or relationship prospect. And then I'd stay at a distance from her...

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

I don't believe that we spent any attention on communicating what the boundary/headspace/preference/environmental background was

Without communications, then... how would you have known to not take it as a personal reflection?

First off - I wouldn't describe this as a case of going without communication - just that it did get any active attention, and went without explicit verbal communication.

It was a casual request where I didn't have my self worth wrapped up in somebody else's response. Despite declining my request we continued to get along well and were enjoying one another's company, and did include an explicit invitation to continue in and around her personal space. So - the particular why's of declining the kiss weren't necessary to continuing our interaction, nor were they a crippling blow to my ego.

I think that's the key right there - that I didn't let it hit me as an ego damaging affront. Because, obviously, for whatever reason, there is some part of any reaction to me that is a personal reflection on me.

And then there's the receptivity-gauge... a woman that was OK with that assertive introduction method would conversely probably miss out on me altogether, as I'd figure that anyone whose boundaries were that permissive probably wouldn't work out as a friend or relationship prospect. And then I'd stay at a distance from her...</cite And that too I find to be an interesting projection - since I have seen similar levels of permissive boundaries at one time or another in most of our common lj friends. I point this out because it seems that there must be some genuine friends of yours in that list. So in at least some cases (most of the ones I've seen) your suspicion that it "probably wouldn't work out" appears incorrect. Maybe that premise needs reworked? Perhaps an opportunity to note that the motto "embrace the power of AND!" applies quite broadly, and could help decouple the notion that someone who appreciates my approach to socializing wouldn't automatically be a bad match for yours?

[akienm.livejournal.com]

Brain, if you got an email from the planet Mars detailing how to build a ship to get there quickly, easily, and cheaply, would you ignore it? Even if you didn't understand each bit, if there were detailed enough instructions, would you try and build whatever mechanism and see if it worked?

If the answer is yes, consider this: When you get instructions from women on how to relate to women, why aren't you taking their word as what is so? Why are you instead remaining imprisioned by your fears?

I am not looking for an answer. I am not looking to dominate you with my ideas. But I do see you resisting information on how to relate to women given to you by women. That seems suboptimal to me.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Agreed, and those are good points.

If I received ship-building instructions from Mars... I'd have to decode them, probably talk through them with others to make sure that I really understood the construction and testing process. And those plans would refer to alien, Martian materials and tools -- I'd need to figure out if there were existing terrestrial equivalents, or if there were some parts or materials that would have to be created fresh. And which were which.

I might still be dubious about the wisdom of using, say, rubber instead of titanium in some critical Martian component, and might then need to be convinced, even given the instructions. And Martian dimensions might be in a scale unfamilar to me. Once those things were worked out, though, and given detailed, cheap plans, and enough outside backing, then I'd start building a ship.
In the meantime, I'd probably try to build subassemblies of the overall mechanism to see if I could manage the smaller pieces.

why aren't you taking their word as what is so?

I accept their word, as to what is so for them. But there are multiple reasons for asking/discussing rather than just accepting guidance... for some obvious instructions, I feel like I have to explain why I haven't adopted those in the past. Explaining the reasons for my past aversion to some approaches isn't quite the same as rejecting those approaches -- I'm not saying that I'm not going to try these new things in the future. And for other instructions, I just don't understand the underlying reasons and am trying to figure them out. Or how to apply them. In others, I'm not sure of their generality beyond the specific individuals...

I'm grateful for all of the feedback (yours included) and am trying to digest and integrate it. But there are some core attitudes of mine that may keep popping up until I can definitively wrestle and pin them down.

[akienm.livejournal.com]

for some obvious instructions, I feel like I have to explain why I haven't adopted those in the past. Explaining the reasons for my past aversion to some approaches isn't quite the same as rejecting those approaches -- I'm not saying that I'm not going to try these new things in the future.

Justifications accomplish nothing.

This is our frightened inner self trying to "look good" so those around us will accept us.

Explanations always mean we need acknoledgement about something. If I were writing the above paragraph, I'd want acknoledgement that my past actions were sensable in the context of the data I had.

You might ask yourself what you want achnoledged.

Oh, and I didn't say the instructions were in martian, or that they specified martian building materials. For the analogy to have any validity, the instructions would have to be plain engligh, indicating enough understanding on their part to communicate with you in a way you'd understand straight away. (I'm explaining because it looked like you'd taken the example in a way other than I had meant. I am seeking acknoledgement that my point was understood clearly)

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

In a slightly altered state... I think that my first response was still too defensive (and off on a tangent about new hardware development ;). You have excellent points, here... and thanks for the heads-up.

I am not looking to dominate you with my ideas

IMO, ideas should stand or fall on their own merits, ideally. And if nothing else, I haven't been quite listening to what *these specific women* recommend, as far as relating goes. I should buy a clue, sometimes...

[akienm.livejournal.com]

Very good.

[akienm.livejournal.com]

What I have found over the years has been this: No one woman's ideas of how they want to be treated, touched, approached, whatever is universal. That there are pretty much no fixed points.

What I did was to pay attention to those women around me, to what worked for them, and add it to my library. The more women I have known, the larger my library has become.

The early parts of a relationship for me are usually figuring out which things in the library I can use with this new person, and seeing if I can learn anything new that I can add to the library.

One side effect of this is I tend to connect with women of a similar type - intelligent, strong willed, passionate... Because I know well how to relate to those individuals. There are a lot of women I can't connect to, because my library doesn't yet include those types.