Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Guys: 'Grow a pair' and ask her out

One student's take on how to secure a date on Valentine's Day

Published: Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Updated: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 20:02

Boys, we are currently less than one week away from Valentine's Day. Do you have a date? Every year there are too many dateless boys and girls on Valentine's Day, which is comparable to being sober on the 4th of July or starving on Thanksgiving. Holidays give us an excuse to celebrate, so by god we need to celebrate them!

Valentine's Day is the day to show your love to a special someone in your life. However, many people lack a special someone. Not having a special someone gives girls an excuse to stay at home with an extra large box of chocolates, keg of milk and Channing Tatum movies. Not having a special someone gives boys no excuse to be alone, because in our society boys ask the girls on dates.

Girls can say, "I don't have a date because I wasn't asked," which is unfortunately a legitimate excuse.

However the boy's only response is, "I don't have a date because I didn't have the balls to ask the cute brunette that sits behind me in my 3:45 p.m. class."

Boys, we need to realize that we control our destiny on Valentine's Day.

On past Valentine's Days have you ever asked yourself, "Why didn't I ask her to be my Valentine?"

If so, then make this year the year you finally grow a pair and get yourself a Valentine's date. Boys, this is what needs to happen.

Seattle University has a 3:2 female to male ratio, which means there are an abundance of girls to choose from on campus, giving you no excuses for not having a girl to ask.

Every day you walk around campus, and see so many cute, smart, funny girls that deserve a date for Valentine's Day, and you must deliver.

However, the difficult task of any Valentine's Day endeavor is overcoming the fear and summoning the courage to say, "Hey, would you be my Valentine?"

This act of ultimate courage is the key to locking down a date for Valentine's Day. If you can do this, they will most likely reward you with an answer of "Yes! You handsome hunk of man, I will be your Valentine!" (Answers may vary).

Trust me, the only person that wants a date more than you is the girl.

Girls are dependent on boys to ask them on a date and if boys aren't asking, girls aren't going.

Needless to say, if you put the question out there, girls will not miss the opportunity to have a date for Valentine's Day. We must find the power of love within ourselves and share it with a lucky girl.

After all, Valentine's Day is the day to share love, and what better way share love than with a date, over a fancy dinner and some downtown entertainment. So boys, it's time to step up to the plate, be a man, and ask a lucky girl that will give you a Valentine's Day you will always remember.


Adam may be reached at johns113@seattleu.edu

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

23 comments

Anonymous
Sun Feb 14 2010 20:19
This Ernie guy has got it.
Joe Clark
Sun Feb 14 2010 18:50
Well phrased Mr. Piper. Much more thought provoking than all of those ranting idiots before us...am I right?
Ernie
Sat Feb 13 2010 21:47
I see a few common defenses of this article which niggle at me: 1. “Don’t be so oversensitive! This is just a funny article, so don’t take it seriously!” 2. “Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion!” Mr Alex M and Mr Matt L most recently used a variation of the first defense (“Just read the damn article for what it is, a funny yet thought-provoking commentary on dating during mid-February;” and “You are all making pretty serious judgments on the moral character of a person you have never met and, yes, you are ASSUMING he supports some misogynistic agenda”) and another anonymous commentator uses the second (“isn’t it called an opinion article for a reason…?”). The reason that I assume Mr Johnson supports a misogynistic agenda is because this article implies, whether it intended to or not, that all women, gay or straight, are passive waifs who pine away waiting for a ballsy knight to come and rescue them from a life of dreary education. Do I think Mr Johnson has ever done anything physically or emotionally harmful to women? No. It’s evident from the tone that the article is not meant to be taken seriously. I get that it’s supposed to be funny. What bothers me is the unconscious reproduction of sexist attitudes that become internalized over long-term exposure. Fighting this sort of problem “in the real world” means confronting it head-on wherever it occurs, whether that be in a domestic abuser or a wry article on college dating. Contrary to what may be believed about me, my social life does not in fact suck, nor do I love killing the joke. I’m merely saying this article is one tiny piece in a massive cultural jigsaw puzzle that defines what “man,” “woman,” and “relationships” are supposed to be like. The reason I dislike expressions of these particular definitions is because attitudes like these help create social structures that disempower and infantilize both women AND men. Did you ever wonder why it’s statistically more likely for men propose to their wives? Or, on a related note, do you ever wonder why this article is addressed only to straight-identified people, and why that’s okay? Or, do you ever wonder why people get upset about these sorts of things instead of just laughing it off? In short, this critique is not about preserving people’s feelings. I’m aiming my critique at dominant, disempowering social structures, which this article happens to be a manifestation of: funny or not, serious or not. In short, people are only entitled to their opinion if they’ve tried to understand just what their opinion is, and if they are willing to engage in honest, open debate about its possible implications. I encourage all who read this article and these comments to take this criticism seriously—do I unconsciously support institutions with word and deed that I claim to be against? Or to put it more plainly: if Adam Johnson is truly not a sexist, I encourage him to prove it by not writing sexist articles. Ernie Piper
Alex M
Sat Feb 13 2010 17:25
Good article! A lot of the people that posted before me are really taking this the wrong way. The reason that Valentine's Day is a great day to ask someone out, is because it gives the "illusion" of an excuse to talk to and go out on a date with someone. To the first several posters who believe that the author is a rapist / racist / sexist / polygamist / (insert negative word here, adding -ist to it), you are taking what he is saying and putting some crazy spin on it that was never intended. How many women do you know that proposed to their husbands? Hmm? Not many. How many men do you know that proposed to their wives? I'm guessing quite a few more. Whether you over-sensitive, Anonymous posters want to admit it or not, men STATISTICALLY tend to be the ones doing the greater percentage of asking, versus women. "...to assume that all men have the option to just pick any "girl" out of this vast sea of open, available, and willing "girls" is appauling." ... All men DO have the option to pick any woman. And all women DO have the option to pick any guy. The funny thing about it is, each can say no if they don't want to go on a date. It is quite simple, actually. "We live in Seattle, one of the most LGBT friendly cities in the country (and perhaps the world)! Rather than going out of your comfort zone to harass women for dates, get out of your comfort zone and address our entire university community with your writing." ... Okay... So each time someone writes about anything having to do with relationships or love or sex, you believe that they must mention gay / lesbian / bisexual / transgender relationships, love, and sex as well, otherwise it is being homophobic or disrespectful? He is writing to a specific audience, so for you to say that him writing only to straight people is "bad", is actually holding up the big middle finger to all heterosexual individuals. Just because Seattle is "one of the most LGBT friendly cities in the country" doesn't mean that all articles written in Seattle must be geared toward them, or away from straight people. In short, to all of you Anonymous haters posting on this blog, stop being so damn pissy about every trivial thing. Stop trying to pull the worst out of a simple, light-hearted article. Stop making the author look like the biggest jackass in the world for encouraging guys to ask someone out that they like. Just read the damn article for what it is, a funny yet thought-provoking commentary on dating during mid-February. Jeez. Oh, and great article, I don't know the author but I certainly respect and applaud him for writing this.
Anonymous
Sat Feb 13 2010 16:13
Adam, I liked your article. I think it's light hearted and funny. Life is about enjoying yourself! Everyone with a negative opinion needs to lighten up... I'm sure their social lives sucks! As for us cool kids, I'm all for a random v-day date. It's like when we were little kids at the roller skate rink and they'd line the girls on one side and the boys on the other, put on a slow song and the girls are hoping they get asked to couples skate. It's cute. - Kandis Hoien
Anonymous
Sat Feb 13 2010 03:21
Isn't it called a opinion article for a reason.....? great article adam! keep up the good work!
Matt L
Fri Feb 12 2010 18:55
People on here are ripping Adam for "assuming" all of these expectations on men and women during valentine's while no one here posted there name and I doubt any of you know or have even met him. You are all making pretty serious judgments on the moral character of a person you have never met and, yes, you are ASSUMING he supports some misogynistic agenda. I know him and you're just wrong. Yes, I understand that the overall message of the article could be offensive to some people, but people have written alot of crap on here about Adam on here and they are out of line. I'm not bashing your ideology, but Adam was not trying to degrade either sex. Instead, he was giving his opinion on his observations of being in college for 3 years. Fine, blame him and vent anonymously on this blog while the problem you are trying to fix is out in the real world. I agree with an earlier comment in that some people will actively look for opportunities to be offended. I applaud people having a strong sense of right and wrong, but to react with such spite and harsh words isn't necessary, is disrespectful and does absolutely no good. I didn't see anybody with a plan commenting just people being angry.
The commentator below
Fri Feb 12 2010 02:56
Sincerely, Ernie Piper.
Anonymous
Fri Feb 12 2010 02:55
There are a few commentators on this fine weblog who seem to be of the opinion that this article might carry sexist assumptions. To quote Anonymous, “Chill the heck out.” I cast my lot behind this bold commenter, though I cannot muster the courage to use such strong language. The brave Anonymous dares to give his (her?) own opinion instead of thoughtlessly reproducing the opinions of the PC police so exhausted below. If I may again perhaps honor their (its?) comment, Anonymous does an excellent job of pointing out how much of the SU community are “nutso’s” and “infer meaning,” yet the finer details of this argument may require elucidation for the oversensitive masses. That is my role.
Unless I'm very much mistaken, this article can be summed up in the following quote:
"Girls are dependent on boys to ask them on a date and if boys aren't asking, girls aren't going."
Let's take a closer look in order to explain just where Anonymous is coming from.
1. "Girls"—It's obvious to anyone that the girls who attend this university are still sexually immature children, merely gamboling in the gardens of adulthood. Isn't it cute when they pretend to learn?
2. "are dependent"—OF COURSE they are. Just name one time when a girl has done something of her own volition or stood up for herself, save Marie Curie, Hellen Keller, Jean of Arc, Dorothy Day, Mother Theresa, Eleanor Roosevelt, Mary Wollstonecraft, Charlotte Perkins-Gilman, Anais Nin, Simone de Beauvoir, and of course Baby Bop. Besides cases such as these, their underdeveloped childlike minds prevent it.
3. "on boys"—This, I believe, the most compelling evidence against sexism. Here Mr Johnson clearly infantilizes men and women to EQUAL degree.
4. "to ask them on a date"—What else would they ask them to? A job interview? A tea party? Ridiculous.
5. “and if boys aren’t asking”—Probably due to weak genes or an impoverished masculinity, no doubt (so well pointed out by Johnson et al, SU Spectator 2010, “Grow a pair”)
<6. “girls aren’t going”—Without the offer of a date, the female hibernates for 10 more years within the chrysalis! This is practically a public service.
Alas, though I could continue, I find myself guilty of wasting the time “crapping” upon this comment page. Tell me how commenting on this article furthers our collective commitment to social justice in any way, when that precious time could be spent volunteering at fraternity houses or the Heritage Foundation. No doubt remains that true men like Mr Johnson (and, if I someday “grow a pair,” myself) will not waste their time worrying over these words, and instead will be swimming in accolades brought in by this strikingly original article, or enjoying the many, many women who now find themselves breathlessly attracted to the fearless, manly, and unshaven Mr Adam Johnson of Seattle University.
Sean Milton
Fri Feb 12 2010 00:09
Who cares. No information included in this article. And, those of you who care to respond should truly have the balls to use your name! Valentine's Day is not a viable holiday in the first place.
Anonymous
Thu Feb 11 2010 23:26
I'm sober on the Fourth of July. I don't become a gluttonous person during Winter holidays. I will not ask some random girl out just because it's Valentine's Day. This article is ridiculous.
Anonymous
Thu Feb 11 2010 23:24
Anonymous who says "Your defensiveness reveals your own insecurities brought to the forefront of your mind after reading this amazing article." I am a male responder. I think this article is radically sexist. You are assuming the only people who would be upset by this is female. That in itself is an assumption that shouldn't be made.
This is degrading to women. It makes it seem as if, if it weren't for a "man" relationships cannot even be instigated by a woman.
You are most likely someone who shares the article's sexist views. And that's fine - people can think whatever they'd like. However, your assumptions are sexist to think only a woman would find this offensive.
Anonymous
Thu Feb 11 2010 21:20
Very nice. You have impeccable close reading skills. It must take someone of true genius to find the message "Hey guys, go ask girls out instead of being timid" in that article. Because the message that I see is much more vulgar.
Anonymous
Thu Feb 11 2010 21:01
Dear Everybody, Chill the heck out. Wow. Apparently, everybody at SU is a bunch of hypersensitive nutso's. I find it amazing how much people infer into the meaning of simple things like this article. It's like all of you could read a magazine recipe for making chocolate brownies, and somehow find something racist in it. Don't you have anything better to do than crap all over an article that's message is simply "Hey guys, go ask girls out instead of being timid?"
Anonymous
Thu Feb 11 2010 20:57
I don't unserstand what you are angry about. This article is absolutely correct. Your defensiveness reveals your own insecurities brought to the forefront of your mind after reading this amazing article. As for knowing a girl's name before asking her out, there have been people that I see on a regular basis who's name I haven't known until 2 or 3 months in. As for this V-Day, I personally opted to not have any plans as I simply couldn't decide who to ask out of the 4 girls (and 1 guy) that have expressed interest.
Anonymous
Thu Feb 11 2010 20:13
To Joshua Lynch: Regardless of what is said, the Spectator is endorsing this message simply by printing it. Yeah, we talk about free press and all that jazz, but in the grand scheme of things the idea of free press is just as much of a joke as the idea of a truly democratic nation. The Spectator surely wouldn't publish an article bashing minorities or an article that endorses giving women lower work wages simply because they are women. I don't see how Adam Johnson's article is any different save the more covert means of sexism. The spectator has the option to publish op-ed pieces. Bottom line. And if you are choosing to publish articles, you are choosing to endorse those articles. It doesn't matter if you say "We don't endorse op-ed pieces". They are still printed in your newspaper.
Anonymous
Thu Feb 11 2010 17:59
Aside from the fact that Adam Johnson has completely missed the point of our present-day valentines day (spending time with those you love and reminding them of how much you care, celebratinng love in the most basic sense), I find the conclusions he comes to frankly comical and childish. He manages to equate valentines day to a day for hooking up and picking a date out of the crowd for the heck of it. I wonder if he would also say that Easter is all about the easter bunny, and Christmas marks the annual coming of santa claus and justifiable gluttony. I sincerely hope that Adam utilizes his time at SU well and learns a truthful thing or two about women and the world, since the ratio is so in his favor and I am sure many will be ready to give him a piece of their mind after this article. Thank you to the Spectator for publishing such a piece, bringing this disturbing sentiment of heteronormativity and sexism, that is obviously alive on campus, to light. I hope that it was done with the intent to spark conversation.
Anonymous
Thu Feb 11 2010 16:45
LOL at editor ditching this article's writer
Joshua Lynch, editor
Thu Feb 11 2010 16:30
@ Anonymous #1
Just because The Spectator chose to run the op-ed doesn't mean it endorses the message, author or cause. Only the pieces labeled "editorials" and The Ten are endorsed opinions by The Spectator.
Joshua Lynch
Editor-in-Chief
Anonymous
Thu Feb 11 2010 16:04
Grow a pair? Oh my, it seems someone forgot we aren't in high school anymore.
Guy - has it occurred to you that Valentine's day shouldn't be used as an excuse to ask people out?
Perhaps you don't realize that not everyone wants something to do on Valentine's day?
Maybe you don't realize that a ratio (which, by the way, is kinda disgusting when you are looking at girls as a ratio) means nothing if a girl isn't interested?
I also find it appalling that you call the other men on campus "boy" several times to show your place as a man. If you can call it that.
Maybe you don't realize that randomly asking out a girl, whose name you don't even know, as shown by the "I don't have a date because I didn’t have the balls to ask the cute brunette that sits behind me in my 3:45 p.m. class.” line, is actually really creepy?
Some guys have class - which you obviously lack.But I guess that's all you know, right?
Being a man is strictly about getting some to you.
No responsibility, no caring, no intelligence.
To Adam Johnson, just ask out any random girl and you'll "be a man." Sexy.






log out