Of Mark & Faith, And Self Faithlessness

First, I must preface this by saying that I was barely of legal age. Definitely a most confusing time; but still, I wasn't the sort to chase a guy.

Frustrated with his wandering attentions, I cornered him at the bar.

"Mark," I said, "what's going on?"

Blank stare. But while he tried to dodge the question by pretending he had no clue what was going on, I did have his attention. I decided to press ahead, be more direct.

"Why are you staring at Faith when you're supposed to be on a date with me?"

"Well, we went out..."

"I know that. But it's over, right?"

"Yeah. But it's hard to ignore a woman with a bunch of guys drooling over her like that."

"You think they're drooling over her?" I asked, equal parts defiance and bewilderment, for what I saw was a bunch of guys on the scent of a bitch in heat -- a girl who would give it up, and, well, it was growing closer to closing time.

"Well, just look at 'em!" he sputtered.

"Babe, all I see is a girl willing to put-out and guys who've had no better luck elsewhere looking for a hand-out."

"You really don't see the difference, do you," I said more than asked. "They don't want her, they just want a fuck and she's handing them out."

"Well, it's not like she's completely ugly or something," he said.

"That's not the point," I said. Then I sighed and asked him, "Who do you want to be with: the woman every one wants to be with, or the woman everyone's been with?"

I thought it was a simple question -- a rather brilliant question, actually. But Mark didn't get it. I think it's simple, but let me explain it.

Read the question carefully. It's not saying, or even implying, that the former is a virgin and the latter a skank. Nor does it mean that the two are mutually exclusive -- but you do have to choose which one.

Since the former, the one everyone wants to be with, is the definition of desirability, the answer is sort of given away. But what the question gets to is the issue of availability, of giving it away (perhaps even non-discriminating), even if not particularly desired.

In this case, a line of men who'll take what they can get from a girl willing to give it. OK, and my frustration that Mark, who had been through a bad relationship with, and I quote, "a cheating bitch who couldn't keep her legs shut," would once again be interested in her -- even though I, a nice girl, was right there at his side.

Now I should probably state a few other things, like the fact that while I was no virgin, I certainly didn't cheat, and I didn't just give it away to anyone and everyone. And that I do consider sex pros (escorts, hookers, prostitutes) to be part of the 'wanted to be with' group as opposed to the 'a woman everyone's been with' group because they have standards, rules, and don't just give it away to anyone (not even just anyone who's willing to pay). Faith, and those like her, don't just give-it-up, they give-it-away -- to anyone. And they look like they will too.

She dressed with just enough body parts covered to be legally allowed out in public; which could be a matter of opinion, I suppose, but combined with her posture it was rather clear she was giving the free looks as bait for trolling. She made a $10 crack whore look classy. (But hey, Faith was saving them $10!)

I shouldn't joke; that's sad.

These girls look and act desperate because they are desperate.

They fear no one really wants them, so they give away what they perceive has value. They have no terms, no rules, no agreement for exchange. Sex need not be for love, need not be for money; but it shouldn't be something you give away as if it has no value. People should get something for it, like pleasure and simple respect, for starters. But Faith didn't care enough to ask for any of those things, to ask for any thing; because Faith didn't believe she'd get it. Nor care that she wouldn't get it.

Even if the interest in her was pure lust, the lust should be for her. She shouldn't be reduced to just a free sperm receptacle. And she definitely shouldn't be the one doing the reducing.

Looking back, I feel sorry for Faith. And for any other 'Faiths' that are out there right now. But at the time, all I could see was that Mark was similarly suffering. And making me suffer for it too.

Mark was confused. He didn't seem to notice the difference between lays, between the girls he laid or could lay. He couldn't see the difference between a girl who valued herself (and all that she offered) and a girl who didn't even value herself enough not to offer herself to any passer-by. And because Mark couldn't see it, didn't value the person of value, he was similarly doomed to no sense of his own worth.

I, of course, suffered because I liked him and couldn't understand how he couldn't see in himself the person I valued. I should have seen that this all meant that Mark couldn't really value me either. But, as I said, I was barely legal and lacking in enough experience and knowledge of these things to know better. So instead of just walking away right then and there, I tried to force a conversation and repeated my question.

"Who do you want to be with: the woman every one wants to be with, or the woman everyone's been with?"

He repeated his confused stare.

I tried a different phrasing, "If and when a person -- male or female -- gives it away, without it even being desired, well, what's there to be interested in?"

He had no real answer, just mumbled something about they desired sex and were willing to get it from her so they must desire her -- some sort of transitive property defense -- which I still find laughable.

But I had my answer. Mark was not the kind of guy I should be wasting my time with if he couldn't even see the difference between desiring a person for themselves versus just wanting a fuck.

From that moment on, life, dating and relationships have been pretty easy for me. Well, it hasn't always been easy; but I had a good barometer. I could figure it out.