Elizabeth (the delinquent, ecumenical) (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
hermionesviolin) wrote2006-09-27 10:58 pm
hermionesviolin) wrote2006-09-27 10:58 pm
info-dump: the continuing saga, CAUMC session on faith and the bible, and a language poll
On my way to class on Tuesday I saw all these people dressed in white with angel wings handing out Cirque du Soleil flyers. Definitely brightened my day.
Class itself was a bit of a downer, unfortunately. I'd forgotten that we were still gonna spend some time on "The Dead," so I hadn't even brought The Dubliners with me. (Not that I was excited about A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man either.)
That afternoon, Cailin was talking about how Eric spends a lot of time at my desk and doesn't do that with, for example, Alyssa. She is correct about that, but it's one of those things that sounds like flirting when the story gets told but doesn't feel to me at all like flirting while it's happening.
I feel like I should create a tag for this whole "should we hook up?" issue, 'cause really the main purpose of tagging is to be able to easily pull up all the entries relating to a particular topic.
I thought of her this morning when Eric came up to my area because he had this tedious task to do and if he did it at his computer he would just keep distracting himself and never get it done, whereas if he came up to my area he could talk to me while he worked so it would get done and he wouldn't go crazy. See, again with the stories where I know when I'm telling them that listeners are getting knowing looks on their faces, but it just isn't like that. I'll grant Cailin's assertion of his denseness in that it has probably never occurred to him that these interactions could be read that way, but I less buy that it has just never occurred to him to think about dating me -- unless he is, as I suspect, entirely uninterested in me That Way. (I suppose in part I'm projecting my sexualization of everything onto everyone else, but the male stereotype validates me there.)
At CAUMC that night I met Amy and Sue. Sue said that her Eric is a nice guy but hangs out with Neanderthals. He wasn't present; this was part of her Affirmation of Trelawney's Eric, whom her Eric had really hit it off with. One thing I've found really strange about being around these married people is how difficult their marriages seem to be. I was realizing that while I have a lot more faith in the possibility of long-lasting marital-type partnerships than many people I do because I've grown up with them (my parents in particular) I don't actually have models per se in terms of making difficult partnerships work* -- and given how much stuff is and should be worked out in private, I'm not really sure there's any way around that, though of course I keep thinking about media portrayals of relationships and what kinds of ideals/expectations we are enculturated with. I was also thinking about how one of my resistances around potentially entering into a romantic-sexual relationship is that I don't want to settle, but I also know I overanalyze.
*Though my parents certainly disagreed etc. in front of my brother and I -- and I think it's hugely important to model for your children that people can disagree and even fight and still love each other and make it work.
I went with a bunch of people to The Red House (overpriced, btw; and their potato gnocchi isn't available sans bacon) for lunch today for Cailin and Claire's birthdays, and there was much talk about coffee, and of course I so don't drink coffee and I talked about being a stubborn Yankee (independent, self-reliant, etc.) and about being contrary, and we also got to talking about other stuff and quoted Sharon on my 'zen-like resistance to the consumerist loop' and said I wasn't normatively socialized (and also talked about how my family's economic situation affected how I was raised).
On the way back to the office, Cailin broached the Eric thing (she really has been good about not wanting to push/make me uncomfortable, and she says she won't say anything to him herself -- which I appreciate immensely) and I continue to just have difficulty wrapping my head around the idea that if a male spends lots of time with a female he has to like her That Way. (I mean, I get it, I really do, but I always have to consciously shift my thinking because it's just not how I experience life.) I know for a fact that Eric has numerous female friends, and while my other examples of male friends are mostly gay (and therefore probably don't count for this data set), thinking back to high school there was definitely friendly mixing between the males and females in our Accelerated track peer group. Admittedly it was often very sexually charged and people's close friends were almost exclusively of their own gender, but I still think it validly supports my position.
I rehashed some of it with Alyssa, and later that afternoon she e-mailed me:
At CAUMC we're starting Living The Questions.
We watched a half-hour DVD, and I was a bit disappointed that all the people who talked seemed to agree with each other (Trelawney had commented that they won't all agree with each other and certainly we may not all agree with them/each other, so if you're gonna crit one of the speakers do it lovingly allowing other people space to agree with them).
[We read the Foreword and Disclaimer before watching the video. Afterward I read the actual chapter. It did a better job than the video did of conveying to me what this section was actually focusing on. And it contains some v. good stuff like quoting Marcus Borg from his Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time: "The Christian life is not primarily about believing the right things or even being good. The Christian life is about being in relationship with God which transforms us into more and more compassionate beings, 'into the likeness of Christ.'" However, it jars me right out because it quotes Mark Twain "believe twelve unbelievable things before breakfast." Do there exist people who don't know it's Lewis Carroll -- specifically the Red Queen -- "six impossible things before breakfast"?
Moving back to what I like from the chapter: "Well, if the Bible is just the product of humans, then what sets it apart from all the other ancient texts and holy books?" In short, two thousand years of people's experiencing its contents as a means of grace and as a life-changing window into the divine. And from their paraphrase of Frederick Buechner's window metaphor: "We learn to distinguish between what is part of the window and what is beyond." Though I have problems with both these passages.]
I think all these bits that stuck out for me are from Spong, but I wasn't actually taking notes, so I might be wrong.
Someone was asking him about the story of Jacob wrestling with the angel/God, and he really embraced that metaphor. He also talked about being on a journey (into the mystery of God). He said that the periods of certainty in the Church's history led to persecution. He also talked about how the Biblical metaphors of Christians are minority images -- salt in the soup, yeast in the bread, light in the darkness.
After the video, people were basically, "Yeah, yay non-literalism." I broke the ice by talking about how I'm uncomfortable not having something authoritative to go to (I don't trust community, tradition, or my prayer relationship with God) and I worry about everything any given person dislikes being interpreted away (Michelle pointed out that people do this anyway -- ignoring/disregarding what they don't like -- even if they claim to be literalists). I admitted that the Bible is full of problematic stuff -- that it would make my life so much easier if I could just dismiss it all -- and the non-literalist approach makes them far easier to deal with but I also have serious difficulties with it.
Andrew brought that up in his Affirmation of me, saying that the fact that I keep wrestling with it is the definition of faith. I hadn't really thought of it like that before -- for a number of reasons -- but it does make sense now that I've heard it articulated like that.
During discussion, Mike talked about how uncertainty is not compelling -- as in, it's hard to motivate most people if you can't give them something definitive. He at one point admitted that he was playing devil's advocate, though I don't think that was the entirety of his motivation (i.e., I think he was wrestling with some of these things as well) and at one point, Meredith said, somewhat frustrated: "Enough of playing Devil's Advocate; what do YOU believe?" which actually upset me a little because I so prize devil's advocating (plus am well aware of its value as a safe way to voice unpopular opinions) though I can understand her frustration.
Much reference was made to my apartment-warming during Affirmations, of course. (Both for and from me.)
Meredith said I have good friends, which speaks well of me as a person. I forget when she and Mike arrived exactly, but they were mostly around for the post-4pm shift when it was just my HBS girls. We talked about politics, Libertarians and Objectivists, the intolerance of "tolerance" on the Left, etc., and I didn't have to kill anyone, which pleased me. They are good people, but it was interesting thinking about them being used as a representative sample of my friends, because in so many ways they aren't.
Michelle affirmed how clearly welcoming my apartment was to LGBT folk. "That's 'cause we're all queer," I piped up. [I also really don't think of our apartment as that obvious. OriginalRoomie has a Safe Space card up on her door, and I have the "My mother made me a homosexual, and if you give her some yarn she'll make you one too (Quentin Crisp)" daily quote page up on my door, and that's it.]
Afterward, Trelawney said to me, "Had you told me you were queer? I don't remember that." I just kinda shrugged and said I didn't remember if it had ever come up before. She said she loves when people feel comfortable enough to share that with the group. For all my dithering about explicitly Coming Out to people (even people I know are queer-friendly), I very rarely have discomfort around it being known that I am in fact queer.
Eric's affirmations for a variety of people were that they stepped up into leadership roles during his and Trelawney's absence, which was funny in that I (and I suspect many others) hadn't really thought of it as such but just as what one does (i.e., stepping up to make sure everything gets done and runs smoothly).
Prompted by a discussion...
[Poll #831777]
Class itself was a bit of a downer, unfortunately. I'd forgotten that we were still gonna spend some time on "The Dead," so I hadn't even brought The Dubliners with me. (Not that I was excited about A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man either.)
That afternoon, Cailin was talking about how Eric spends a lot of time at my desk and doesn't do that with, for example, Alyssa. She is correct about that, but it's one of those things that sounds like flirting when the story gets told but doesn't feel to me at all like flirting while it's happening.
I feel like I should create a tag for this whole "should we hook up?" issue, 'cause really the main purpose of tagging is to be able to easily pull up all the entries relating to a particular topic.
I thought of her this morning when Eric came up to my area because he had this tedious task to do and if he did it at his computer he would just keep distracting himself and never get it done, whereas if he came up to my area he could talk to me while he worked so it would get done and he wouldn't go crazy. See, again with the stories where I know when I'm telling them that listeners are getting knowing looks on their faces, but it just isn't like that. I'll grant Cailin's assertion of his denseness in that it has probably never occurred to him that these interactions could be read that way, but I less buy that it has just never occurred to him to think about dating me -- unless he is, as I suspect, entirely uninterested in me That Way. (I suppose in part I'm projecting my sexualization of everything onto everyone else, but the male stereotype validates me there.)
At CAUMC that night I met Amy and Sue. Sue said that her Eric is a nice guy but hangs out with Neanderthals. He wasn't present; this was part of her Affirmation of Trelawney's Eric, whom her Eric had really hit it off with. One thing I've found really strange about being around these married people is how difficult their marriages seem to be. I was realizing that while I have a lot more faith in the possibility of long-lasting marital-type partnerships than many people I do because I've grown up with them (my parents in particular) I don't actually have models per se in terms of making difficult partnerships work* -- and given how much stuff is and should be worked out in private, I'm not really sure there's any way around that, though of course I keep thinking about media portrayals of relationships and what kinds of ideals/expectations we are enculturated with. I was also thinking about how one of my resistances around potentially entering into a romantic-sexual relationship is that I don't want to settle, but I also know I overanalyze.
*Though my parents certainly disagreed etc. in front of my brother and I -- and I think it's hugely important to model for your children that people can disagree and even fight and still love each other and make it work.
I went with a bunch of people to The Red House (overpriced, btw; and their potato gnocchi isn't available sans bacon) for lunch today for Cailin and Claire's birthdays, and there was much talk about coffee, and of course I so don't drink coffee and I talked about being a stubborn Yankee (independent, self-reliant, etc.) and about being contrary, and we also got to talking about other stuff and quoted Sharon on my 'zen-like resistance to the consumerist loop' and said I wasn't normatively socialized (and also talked about how my family's economic situation affected how I was raised).
On the way back to the office, Cailin broached the Eric thing (she really has been good about not wanting to push/make me uncomfortable, and she says she won't say anything to him herself -- which I appreciate immensely) and I continue to just have difficulty wrapping my head around the idea that if a male spends lots of time with a female he has to like her That Way. (I mean, I get it, I really do, but I always have to consciously shift my thinking because it's just not how I experience life.) I know for a fact that Eric has numerous female friends, and while my other examples of male friends are mostly gay (and therefore probably don't count for this data set), thinking back to high school there was definitely friendly mixing between the males and females in our Accelerated track peer group. Admittedly it was often very sexually charged and people's close friends were almost exclusively of their own gender, but I still think it validly supports my position.
I rehashed some of it with Alyssa, and later that afternoon she e-mailed me:
I think you have a very healthy attitude about things. I guess lack of “normal” socialization leads to objective decision-making and rational thought in adulthood. And all of us “normally socialized” turn into overly emotional, neurotic adults – aka – normal. :)
***
At CAUMC we're starting Living The Questions.
We watched a half-hour DVD, and I was a bit disappointed that all the people who talked seemed to agree with each other (Trelawney had commented that they won't all agree with each other and certainly we may not all agree with them/each other, so if you're gonna crit one of the speakers do it lovingly allowing other people space to agree with them).
[We read the Foreword and Disclaimer before watching the video. Afterward I read the actual chapter. It did a better job than the video did of conveying to me what this section was actually focusing on. And it contains some v. good stuff like quoting Marcus Borg from his Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time: "The Christian life is not primarily about believing the right things or even being good. The Christian life is about being in relationship with God which transforms us into more and more compassionate beings, 'into the likeness of Christ.'" However, it jars me right out because it quotes Mark Twain "believe twelve unbelievable things before breakfast." Do there exist people who don't know it's Lewis Carroll -- specifically the Red Queen -- "six impossible things before breakfast"?
Moving back to what I like from the chapter: "Well, if the Bible is just the product of humans, then what sets it apart from all the other ancient texts and holy books?" In short, two thousand years of people's experiencing its contents as a means of grace and as a life-changing window into the divine. And from their paraphrase of Frederick Buechner's window metaphor: "We learn to distinguish between what is part of the window and what is beyond." Though I have problems with both these passages.]
I think all these bits that stuck out for me are from Spong, but I wasn't actually taking notes, so I might be wrong.
Someone was asking him about the story of Jacob wrestling with the angel/God, and he really embraced that metaphor. He also talked about being on a journey (into the mystery of God). He said that the periods of certainty in the Church's history led to persecution. He also talked about how the Biblical metaphors of Christians are minority images -- salt in the soup, yeast in the bread, light in the darkness.
After the video, people were basically, "Yeah, yay non-literalism." I broke the ice by talking about how I'm uncomfortable not having something authoritative to go to (I don't trust community, tradition, or my prayer relationship with God) and I worry about everything any given person dislikes being interpreted away (Michelle pointed out that people do this anyway -- ignoring/disregarding what they don't like -- even if they claim to be literalists). I admitted that the Bible is full of problematic stuff -- that it would make my life so much easier if I could just dismiss it all -- and the non-literalist approach makes them far easier to deal with but I also have serious difficulties with it.
Andrew brought that up in his Affirmation of me, saying that the fact that I keep wrestling with it is the definition of faith. I hadn't really thought of it like that before -- for a number of reasons -- but it does make sense now that I've heard it articulated like that.
During discussion, Mike talked about how uncertainty is not compelling -- as in, it's hard to motivate most people if you can't give them something definitive. He at one point admitted that he was playing devil's advocate, though I don't think that was the entirety of his motivation (i.e., I think he was wrestling with some of these things as well) and at one point, Meredith said, somewhat frustrated: "Enough of playing Devil's Advocate; what do YOU believe?" which actually upset me a little because I so prize devil's advocating (plus am well aware of its value as a safe way to voice unpopular opinions) though I can understand her frustration.
Much reference was made to my apartment-warming during Affirmations, of course. (Both for and from me.)
Meredith said I have good friends, which speaks well of me as a person. I forget when she and Mike arrived exactly, but they were mostly around for the post-4pm shift when it was just my HBS girls. We talked about politics, Libertarians and Objectivists, the intolerance of "tolerance" on the Left, etc., and I didn't have to kill anyone, which pleased me. They are good people, but it was interesting thinking about them being used as a representative sample of my friends, because in so many ways they aren't.
Michelle affirmed how clearly welcoming my apartment was to LGBT folk. "That's 'cause we're all queer," I piped up. [I also really don't think of our apartment as that obvious. OriginalRoomie has a Safe Space card up on her door, and I have the "My mother made me a homosexual, and if you give her some yarn she'll make you one too (Quentin Crisp)" daily quote page up on my door, and that's it.]
Afterward, Trelawney said to me, "Had you told me you were queer? I don't remember that." I just kinda shrugged and said I didn't remember if it had ever come up before. She said she loves when people feel comfortable enough to share that with the group. For all my dithering about explicitly Coming Out to people (even people I know are queer-friendly), I very rarely have discomfort around it being known that I am in fact queer.
Eric's affirmations for a variety of people were that they stepped up into leadership roles during his and Trelawney's absence, which was funny in that I (and I suspect many others) hadn't really thought of it as such but just as what one does (i.e., stepping up to make sure everything gets done and runs smoothly).
***
Prompted by a discussion...
[Poll #831777]
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I love you.
no subject
Based on what I've read about LTQ (and what I've read by some of the people featured), I know I'd hate it. There's virtually no doubt of that. I could say more incendiary stuff about Spong et al., but maybe I'll save it for when I see you...
no subject
Part of me would love to do the Alpha course because I so thrive on being contrary (though I don't think I have enough background to actually hold my own in an argument -- I'm assuming of course doing Alpha with people who would generally agree with the Alpha perspective, not the CAUMC group).
A couple people in group mentioned being familiar with some of the speakers' works and not always liking them but that they could definitely get behind what they were saying in this particular video. I really should read some of at least Spong and Borg because they're such big names. I recognize Spong from previous rants from you and Lindsey though the details didn't stick because having no familiarity with his work I didn't have anything to attach them to in my brain. You can be incendiary here or when you visit, or both.
no subject
It's ironic, basically.
no subject
no subject
I agree. It's like the whole, "I don't believe; Lord, help my unbelief" verse.
no subject
Though absolutely there is a long tradition both in Judaism and Christianity of faith struggle.
"help my unbelief"
"Help my unbelief" is actually how I came to be a born again Christian. Usually the evangelical line is, "Lord, I believe, come into my heart" or something along those lines. I could not pray "I believe" so I prayed, "I want to believe (that You are my Saviour), please help my unbelief" And something changed in my soul that has never gone back -- and in a moment I did believe. What, exactly, I believe is not always clear to me. But in some way, I believe that Jesus is the Christ, and that I am, in some way, His, and I have never felt that I have been separated from God since then. What it means to be saved, what it mean for Jesus of Nazareth to be the Christ, all of that? Well, my understanding changes. God is too big for me to grasp. But - I know that I believe, and that I love God, and nothing has been able to change that. I find that interesting because, like Hermione, I struggle, I wrestle, and God knows I don't feel a kinship with evangelical or fundamental congregations. And yet, here I am, a somewhat bemused born again Christian. Given my particular world, I tend to feel about as comfortable about saying I'm born again as many feel about saying "I'm gay", again, rather amusing. God works in mysterious ways. Rather longer than I intended - but I couldn't resist.
Re: "help my unbelief"
Andrew's comment [about continuing to wrestle, despite all the reasons to do otherwise, being what faith is] provided me the possibility of [for the first time in I don't know how long] feeling comfortable with the idea of calling myself a person of faith. (Though of course I have inherited Daddy's most everything and would in a lot of ways still love to be able to just reject it all -- er, the "it" being faith-related stuff.)
I really like your point about relationship -- since for me recently, everything relates back to issues of relationship and the difficulties of being in relationship :)
Re: "help my unbelief"
I am a pastor's daughter. Dad pastored his first church when I was 9, but before that he'd been an elder and the song leader. Because my father was always "in the spotlight" so to speak, I've always been expected to be an example, too. And that's a lot to ask of a kid. Particularly when I didn't get a lot of answers as to "why" we believed certain things. I still don't get a lot of answers in that regard. And so my belief in Christ has come to feel more like just another part of the costume that I put on, the character I play. And I resent it. I deeply resent that character because while I know that she's a part of me, she doesn't seem to have any real substance. And while I know it isn't His fault, I rather resent God, too.
As usual, my words haven't really gone where I'd intended for them to go. But I'm not going to change them. I'm just going to say "thanks." Thanks for being so open in this regard. Sometimes shared struggle is the best tool He gives us.
Re: "help my unbelief"
Re: "help my unbelief"
I figure I try to give born again Christians a good name :)
non-normative
All those years of struggling against The Culture actually paid off!
Re: non-normative
More and more I'm coming to the conclusion that the stance of Cailin et al comes from certain conceptions about how males are in the world, which frustrates me on a number of levels -- it's inaccurate, generalizations bother me, essentialism often discomfits me, it reflects poorly on males (which brings up lots of other issues for me), etc.
y/our years of struggle are only just now paying off? I thought I'd been doing fairly well for a while now ;)
Re: non-normative
And yeah, I almost hestiated about the not sexualizing cuz I know everything is all about sex :) But it's the idea that you see people as people and don't make assumptions. If everyone were like you, it sure would be easier to develop normal friendships. Good to know you can be a role model for your peers :)
Making marriages--and classrooms--work
(Anonymous) 2006-09-29 09:37 pm (UTC)(link)This made me think of the classroom management course I took over the summer. Our guru was a guy named Fred Jones, who used to be a professor studying why some classrooms worked and some didn't. Near the beginning of that part of his career, he would go into classrooms and observe how well things went. He would then go to the successful teachers and ask them what they did to make things go well. They would rarely be able to say anything beyond a generality like, "They know I mean business." How do they know? Well ...
I suspect people in marriages that work are similar. "We communicate." Okay ...
Jones thinks that after thousands of hours of observation and thinking about things and talking with teachers that he knows some of the ways that successful teachers do it--and he may be right; this year is definitely better, partly because of things from the course.
There may be similar things for a good marriage--or there might not. In any case, I think people mostly muddle through, relying on experience, hope, vague ideas about the way spouses are and the way things "should be."
When they speak about it in a group like you're in, I suspect they focus on the struggle and difficulty.
A lot of it is experience and muddling, and finding out "what works for you." Which inevitably involves finding out some of the things that don't work for you. Ah, life is messy.
no subject
they are. no question about it. imagine it, you are committed to someone, lumps and all...yours and theirs, every single thing you do affects one another, and, as with all relationships, there are days when you are just in completely different moods and you're wondering if the other person just neglected to mention the fact that they are from Jupiter or something.
but on the flip side, it's very comforting to always be with your best friend, to know that they are thinking of you, that you'll come home and tell eachother about this or that knowing that he/she'll totally *get* it, or at least get why it affected you like it did. it's "choosing your battles," knowing the things that are worth struggling over, and those struggles that will just never get resolved.
so yeah, it's hard. but worth it. IMHO, that is.
i was thinking of you the other day, that we walked in the snow on my birthday weekend. i can't even fathom the fact that that could conceivably happen again a month from now...
no subject
> knowing that he/she'll totally *get* it, or at least get why it affected you like it did.
One thing I've found strange being around fandom for a while is how many people's S.O.'s don't know about their fannishness, or at least certain aspects of it. This makes a lot of sense to me, but on the other hand I'm so used to being able to be so open about it with most people close to me. I definitely found myself in friendships with people thinking "But they just wouldn't *get* X, Y, or Z; could we really be in a serious relationship." Of course this is one of those things there is no manual for, that you just have to figure out through trial and error -- what stuff your S.O. needs to share and what you can get from interactions with other people, etc. (plus of course there's the possibility of getting your S.O. into some of your interests, though obviously you shouldn't count on that).
I think I'm frightened of settling and also frightened of never finding anyone "good enough." I also really like the idea of marrying your best friend but feel like all the people I fall for I'm so different from in so many ways and I wonder/worry how well we would actually work out long-term if we ever had a relationship (and as a corollary, worry that I will never be Interested in anyone I could have any actual relationship with).
This sort of tangented into All About Me and my difficulties having relationships (of any kind -- including platonic) with people, but that's okay :)
*
Wow, that means it's been a year since we last saw each other, huh? We should really get together again sometime. (I had forgotten about walking in the snow. Remembering it now... that was so lovely.)
no subject
the only thing i'd be uncomfortable with is how deeply i dish on his & my arguments, but i liken it to just hashing it out w/my good girlfriends, you know???
so there's that...and the fact that i don't get how someone would voluntarily spend sundays watching football, and mondays listening to crackly AM radio post-game debriefings.
but he'll go shopping now, and i watch the sci-fi channel, and he buys more hair metal CDs than i do, and i go to progressive rock shows. so basically, you sorta rub off on eachother.
it's kind of not restricting yourself to having a "type", because everyone is just so much more than what they appear to be...or something like that!
darling, our day together was fabulous, i'd love to do it again, anytime!!
no subject
I think definitely it's okay to not share EVERYTHING with one's S.O.; I just get weirded out by the extent that people compartmentalize sometimes 'cause my fannishness (porn included) so informs how I engage with any media text, so like how would I go about hiding it? Plus I'm just not v. good at compartmentalizing :)
And absolutely people rub off on each other. Which is much with the good. Though I am always guarding myself against EXPECTATIONS that I can "change" someone. The rubbing off should be a happy bonus :)
My October is filling up, but one of my workmates was mentioning an MFA exhibit on Parisian fashion that's starting Nov. 12, so maybe we could make an MFA date sometime this winter. Or we could totally do a less structured thing just wandering around Boston or chilling at my apartment or whatever.
no subject
anything at all, love, you know i'm easy!! :-)
This reminds me of Attractive Woman Syndrome
(Anonymous) 2006-09-30 04:50 pm (UTC)(link)This reminds me of Attractive Woman Syndrome, a condition that sometimes affects men when they see a woman they find especially attractive. They would like to get to know her better and for that very reason, cannot come with anything interesting or intelligent to say.