Simon’s Theory

I want to re-visit the theory purposed by my homie Simon regarding
women & what you wear to cover your feet. I think he may have had a
legitimate claim, somewhere. He starts by asking what would you be more
inclined to choose: a dirty pair of socks that match or two clean socks
that don't match. One option will look "better" but while no one has to
know they're dirty, you'll still know the truth. Option two will be
clean, as a pair of socks should be for their wearer, but from an
aesthetic point of view they might not be what you want to be seen with.

Now as you let that marinate, let me ask you, which guy does the girl
usually choose: the one who looks better but is a chronic jerk, or the
one who doesn't look like he's all that, but is a quality human being?
*What I added to this argument is that guys do the same thing, so this
argument can't be directed at a single gender.*

It seems that looks prevail more often, although MANY disagreed with
the homie on this point. Don't we all want to be seen with someone that
looks like they were sent from above? Remember now, it's hard to change
people (however not impossible). Or shouldn't we just completely ignore
looks & do what's better for us in the long run? Why not avoid the
stink of a bad relationship & take the road less traveled?

While this thesis has no definitive conclusion, I argue that the clean
pair of socks is better in the long run. Plus, rocking the clashing pair will
probably start a new trend. However, socks simply aren't people. There
are some places where you simply can't be caught wearing socks that
don't match but there's no excuse for staying in an unhealthy
relationship. In closing, I'm more confused now than I was during the
actual debate we had. So confused that I basically just wrote an essay
for no real bumboclat reason!

No comments:

Post a Comment