Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

How the Hell Does [Asking People Out] Work, Actually?

24567

Posts

  • Inkstain82Inkstain82 Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    bowen wrote: »
    Online dating is not without its own pitfalls too. Unattractive people get hit the hardest, yes, but it skews even further if you're male on top of that (OKCupid had a lot of blog posts on this phenomenon that they've since taken down).

    Those blog posts are often misquoted.

    What it showed was that everyone tends to message people more attractive than themselves, men tend to be a bit more egregious about it, women tend to be a bit more reasonable when choosing who to respond to.

    The most predictive facet of whether messages are responded to online is relative equality of attractiveness.

    Inkstain82 on
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Online dating is not without its own pitfalls too. Unattractive people get hit the hardest, yes, but it skews even further if you're male on top of that (OKCupid had a lot of blog posts on this phenomenon that they've since taken down).

    Those blog posts are often misquoted.

    What it showed was that everyone tends to message people more attractive than themselves, men tend to be a bit more egregious about it, women tend to be a bit more reasonable when choosing who to respond to.

    The most predictive facet of whether messages are responded to online is relative equality of attractiveness.

    Yes it showed that, it also showed that men and women rate attractiveness differently too. Men follow a nice bell curve, as to be expected, and women often shifted the curve away. There's no way to really draw conclusions from that by itself either. It could be anything from the cost of dating for women to different experiences. For instance, the girth of messaging means women can be more choosy in a date too (which will shift it away from a standard bell curve).

    It also doesn't address the issue of "you should only use online dating" to address issues with asking people out either. I posit that online dating is great if you're very attractive, but not so great otherwise. Kudos if you get messages constantly, that wasn't my experience. My experience was constant ghosting even after someone was the one to message me first or like me. And it would come in waves which I'm sure was about 30% bots with whatever mechanism the service was using to put me in people's rotations. And going weeks,months,years without social interaction like dating has the chance to make the worst kind of person.

    Ladies.
    mcdermottGnome-InterruptusWiseManTobes
  • IrukaIruka Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited November 2018
    bowen wrote: »

    That's the thing though, "meeting people in the wild" gets hit with the same rule from everyone I've talked to. "If I'm out running errands I don't want to be stopped and propositioned"

    Online dating is not without its own pitfalls too. Unattractive people get hit the hardest, yes, but it skews even further if you're male on top of that (OKCupid had a lot of blog posts on this phenomenon that they've since taken down).

    This is why the group of people who make up incels are so easy to radicalize. There's no good way for them to fill the social needs they have because it's extremely difficult to approach people they do have at least some tangential rapport with, and when they do try with the things that are supposed to be the acceptable avenues it's like screaming into a void for the most part. I think a good first step is legalizing and removing a lot of the stigma around sex work because even just the ability for them to fill a need is going to be a huge boon. I know this doesn't remove a lot of the problems they face, but I honest to god think it's a good first step.

    by "In the wild" I generally mean "getting to know people". I'm extremely disinterested in being hit on or dating people I don't know. Having a tangential rapport is basically critical, why would I be interested in anyone based on the first five sentences you say to me? There is not a magical combination of pickup lines, compliments, or whatever that replaces "I've known this guy for a little bit and he seems like an okay guy that likes me as a human being."

    You are probably a bit more forced to make that initial casual connection with people at work. You can make this sort of casual connection elsewhere though. It might take a little effort in that maybe you need to do one of the modern activities that expands your social group without the sole intent of dating, but that is not an impossibility as an adult if you have a little free time.

    Iruka on
    Gnome-Interruptus
  • ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited November 2018
    I had very little success with dating in high school, a few short lived relationships, but nothing substantial really developed until my early 20's. As the years go by, even as I became more accustomed to how things worked in general, witnessing changes in social structures streamlined some parts and complicated others. Like that article linked in the other thread, where some women ponder fondly how friends or colleagues met their partners, before abruptly realizing how offputting and 'creepy' it would be today. In reading articles (many linked on these very forums) about how women hate being approached at work, on the bus, at bars, at the gym, etc, etc, I think I began to internalize that nobody wants to be approached anywhere. I mean, obviously that's not the case, but even without being entirely oblivious, I think I just ended up defaulting to erring on the side of caution.

    "But I'm not a creepy asshole, and I think I have a better read on this situation... or maybe I don't..." is something I'd find myself second guessing in situations where maybe it might have been appropriate (or maybe just another negative story added to someones repertoire). Doubly so in being 6'3", though I'm asked pretty regularly for help or directions by strangers on the street, so I guess I'm not unapproachably imposing...

    Online dating (I still remember when OKCupid still had remnants of their original 'quiz site' aspect) and the ubiquitous apps take a lot of the uncertainty out of the mix, but as someone who has sent hundreds of messages without a response, who has swiped thousands of times without a match, it can certainly be challenging to remain patient and optimistic against and overwhelming sense that nobody is interested.

    Now, I've been dating someone for over half a year, I get that this isn't at all a fact, but I do empathize strongly with those facing the challenges of the modern dating scene, at least in North America.
    bowen wrote: »
    Bumble responses are usually what you'd expect "hi" or something equally light and still very passive so that the guy can "start" the conversation.

    Some are not, though, obviously.

    What I always found darkly hilarious was how many women's profiles I would read on OKCupid telling guys not to just say Hi or be lazy about an opening message, but almost every matched conversation I had through Bumble started that way. Turns out that when women (at least, those I chatted with) have to start the conversation, they're no better at it than the lazy guys who are mocked in a wide range of profiles.

    Forar on
    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
    bowenHexmage-PALoisLanemcdermottjimb213shrykeMrVyngaardGnome-InterruptusSmrtnikShazkar Shadowstorm
  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    I feel threatened by flirting no matter who does it, pretty much. Doesn't make a big difference if I'm interested, except I'll regret the interaction more. Of course anyone who knows that isn't even going to try, so I still get to regret it when it doesn't happen. Win-win.

  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    17% of one age bracket saying something either "always or usually" means something isn't massively compelling. It's undoubtedly more than it used to be, but even withing that 17% you can imagine a gulf of difference for some values of 'usually'.

    I think that it's is very significant, in part because it's the age bracket that's probably most likely to be dating.

    Basically, for 1 in 5 people between 18 and 29, "Hey, would you like to go get some drinks?" has a pretty good chance at being sexual harassment. I mean, say someone walking out of a class asks that to a fellow student. My thought had been that that would be that that's fine, the person being asked can just decline, and no harm no foul. But if the person being asked or one of the witnesses is one of those 1 in 5 who thinks that that's harassment, then things get awkward. If you take the position that sexual harassment should be reported when it occurs (I think that it should), and you take the position that sexual harassment should be investigated when reported (again, I think that it should), then the logical conclusion is that the person doing the asking should be investigated for sexual harassment.

    At that point, I assume that the investigation would probably find that the asking party hasn't done anything beyond the pale, and at worst they would get sternly told to not make overtures like that on school property. Probably. But what I'm getting at is that I don't think that 17% is too small a a group to be dismissed. For something that could lead to a sexual harassment complaint, 17% is huge. If it had said that 17% of people think that people who ask to hug coworkers are always or usually sexually harassing them, that wouldn't shock me or concern me. I'd be like "Yep, totally, I get that." But asking someone out for drinks? Again, it's basically 1 in 5.

    Interestingly, my workplace's sexual harassment training has incorporated that YouGov poll...

    ...as an example of what not to think.

    Our HR department has explicitly said, "if somebody asks you out once, politely, that is NOT harassment." Our SH program goes on to say stuff like "many people meet their significant others at work, and that's totally okay. Asking out your co-workers is usually fine! Just do it within these guidelines..."

    And it goes into stuff like

    Ask once and take no for an answer. Don't ask repeatedly

    Be polite. Asking to go out for a drink is fine, using sexual terms is not.

    Don't ask out anybody above or below you in your direct chain of command.

    I thought it was pretty cool.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
    bowenCptHamiltonHexmage-PAIncenjucarLindQuidElvenshaeMrMisterShadowhopemcdermottkimeFiatiljimb213shrykeMadpoetMazzyxCalicaAridholJebus314KamarSiskaVerminionGnome-InterruptusShawnaseeFryhanzoZonugalHacksawnever dieHellerbooyFoolOnTheHillMillRoz
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    To be honest, a lot of the issues with dating really stems from shitty toxic masculinity once you boil everything away. Women feel pressured to act a certain way because being too forward is slutty or whatever other word you want to throw at that. I've known guys in my own social circles that act like someone cut off their fucking balls because a girl asked them out. And those are the kind of guys that make online dating shit to begin with. It all starts with them and snowballs out of control.

    Also I'm not saying online dating is great for girls either. It's not. Dating is fucking horrible trash and the best way to ask someone out is to just like do it. Even if it's uncomfortable for you or them. Some people like to be surprised, others don't. It's a schrodinger's person scenario and you won't know until you're in that situation.

    And the best advice I can give is just act reasonable, and like an adult, so if they say no you just acknowledge that as fine and everything should stay exactly the same way it was before.

    Ladies.
    PreacherHexmage-PAShadowhopeKristmas KthulhuGnome-Interruptus
  • Inkstain82Inkstain82 Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    bowen wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Online dating is not without its own pitfalls too. Unattractive people get hit the hardest, yes, but it skews even further if you're male on top of that (OKCupid had a lot of blog posts on this phenomenon that they've since taken down).

    Those blog posts are often misquoted.

    What it showed was that everyone tends to message people more attractive than themselves, men tend to be a bit more egregious about it, women tend to be a bit more reasonable when choosing who to respond to.

    The most predictive facet of whether messages are responded to online is relative equality of attractiveness.

    Yes it showed that, it also showed that men and women rate attractiveness differently too. Men follow a nice bell curve, as to be expected, and women often shifted the curve away. There's no way to really draw conclusions from that by itself either. It could be anything from the cost of dating for women to different experiences. For instance, the girth of messaging means women can be more choosy in a date too (which will shift it away from a standard bell curve).

    It also doesn't address the issue of "you should only use online dating" to address issues with asking people out either. I posit that online dating is great if you're very attractive, but not so great otherwise. Kudos if you get messages constantly, that wasn't my experience. My experience was constant ghosting even after someone was the one to message me first or like me. And it would come in waves which I'm sure was about 30% bots with whatever mechanism the service was using to put me in people's rotations. And going weeks,months,years without social interaction like dating has the chance to make the worst kind of person.

    The same data showed that while women were more likely to say men were below average in a attractiveness, their actual behavior (responding to messages) followed completely normal bell curve.

    I wouldn’t tell anyone to only stick to online dating if they don’t want to. But being relatively unattractive isn’t an impediment to successful online dating *as long as you are realistic about who will be attracted to you*.

    Inkstain82 on
  • tyrannustyrannus Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    Online dating has this "check the box" mentality where you can confuse compatibility with attraction. There's definitely something said to being able to respond to someone's interest in person. Most online dating is 99% rejection based on, like, HR-resume scanning criteria.

    tyrannus on
    Hexmage-PAPreacherdispatch.omcdermottElvenshaeMazzyxMrVyngaardZonugal
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Online dating is not without its own pitfalls too. Unattractive people get hit the hardest, yes, but it skews even further if you're male on top of that (OKCupid had a lot of blog posts on this phenomenon that they've since taken down).

    Those blog posts are often misquoted.

    What it showed was that everyone tends to message people more attractive than themselves, men tend to be a bit more egregious about it, women tend to be a bit more reasonable when choosing who to respond to.

    The most predictive facet of whether messages are responded to online is relative equality of attractiveness.

    Yes it showed that, it also showed that men and women rate attractiveness differently too. Men follow a nice bell curve, as to be expected, and women often shifted the curve away. There's no way to really draw conclusions from that by itself either. It could be anything from the cost of dating for women to different experiences. For instance, the girth of messaging means women can be more choosy in a date too (which will shift it away from a standard bell curve).

    It also doesn't address the issue of "you should only use online dating" to address issues with asking people out either. I posit that online dating is great if you're very attractive, but not so great otherwise. Kudos if you get messages constantly, that wasn't my experience. My experience was constant ghosting even after someone was the one to message me first or like me. And it would come in waves which I'm sure was about 30% bots with whatever mechanism the service was using to put me in people's rotations. And going weeks,months,years without social interaction like dating has the chance to make the worst kind of person.

    The same data showed that while women were more likely to say men were below average in a attractiveness, their actual behavior (responding to messages) followed completely normal bell curve.

    I wouldn’t tell anyone to only stick to online dating if they don’t want to. But being relatively unattractive isn’t an impediment to successful online dating *as long as you are realistic about who will be attracted to you*.

    That must have been a different blog post because I don't remember there being any break down of both men and women on who they actually messaged? Then again it's been about what, 10 years, so I'm probably just misremembering that bit.

    Ladies.
  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    I guess age group stuff varies (I am about to be 23) but if someone I didn't know well kissed me on the hand or anywhere else (except maybe on the cheek when saying goodbye if they were like, European) I would probably stomp on their foot!!

    What are the other circumstances of that person liking that hand kissing interaction. Did she know the man well? Were they already out on a date? Had they discussed interactions like that before (like maybe they had a conversation where she said, I love romance novels and I know it's cheesy but being kissed on the hand seems so romantic)?

    I think never, ever physically touching someone you don't know well outside of like, a handshake or a hug goodbye in a casual setting (and in this case I still ask - a quick 'are you a hugger? It was great to meet you!' works fine and isn't awkward), is probably the way to go.


    ....

    Here are examples of ways I have flirted with people and been flirted with and enjoyed it, and also some do's/don'ts, which are subjective:

    1. Catching someone's eye across the room - not staring, just catching their eye occasionally and maybe smiling a bit. In my experience this works best if the person is doing something in a cafe and not obviously focused/busy/wearing earbuds. So, one time I made eyes with some dude across a Starbucks who seemed to be relaxing and reading, while I was also relaxing and reading. After catching him looking back at me, I raised my book a bit so the title was visible, and gave a questioning look, he did the same, after a bit when he was leaving he came by my table and we chatted about books and art a bit, then he told me that my scarf was very beautiful and left! Nothing came of it, but it was still flirty and fun! You can flirt with people without any intention of follow up, it can just be a fun thing that brightens your day and the other person's and gives you some practice

    2. Giving compliments that are about something someone does, rather than something someone is, can be a great way to not come off awkward in a flirting interaction. 9/10 times, in my experience, "wow you're beautiful", or variations on that theme, from a stranger comes off in an unpleasant way (I've experienced exceptions but they're rare). "Wow, your hair looks great!" Or "That's an amazing outfit" or "your eye makeup is amazing" or "whoa, the way you draw hands is great, how do you do that?" almost never comes off badly to me! It's complimenting me on my choices, on the effort I've obviously made to look nice, or on a skill I've worked hard to learn! Also those compliments are more likely to start a conversation because it gives me a chance to say, like, "thanks! I spent like an hour on it (my outfit/hair/makeup)" and you could say, like, "oh haha, well it's effort well spent! I spend forever picking the right shades of paint when I paint miniatures" or whatever and then hey presto we can talk about Hobbies!

    3. Ok this is a Don't but, I think one of the important things is to never do something you think might be gross and never EVER joke about what you're doing being creepy. The other day a friend of mine got the compliment - "wow, your whole outfit is so put together, you must have put a lot of effort into that!" from a man, and it was really flattering -- until he said "I'm from an older generation, so I can get away with saying things like that!!"

    Then it was instantly GROSS and really upset every woman in the room and we all talked about it after he left. If you think you're getting away with an interaction, if you act like the thing you're doing should be considered unpleasant, then it will suddenly become something icky even if it was benign.

    4. Asking isn't bad! I've had interactions where I wasn't sure if I was being flirted with, and I have just asked, "hey so, was that like, flirting???" and generally people have thought that this was funny and cute and either said "no! Haha sorry" or "yes! Is that ok?". The couple of times that people have asked that to me it's gone the same way!

    5. When someone says no or isn't into the flirting, I find that best practice is to push through the awkward feeling and return to a neutral subject in as casual and calm a way as is possible, and then the awkward tension gradually dissolves

    Thanks for the examples!

    Honestly, my conception of flirting was that you try to guess who might be into you and try to be as suggestive as you can that you would be into them without just coming out and saying it.

    For example:

    Woman: "I just bought this new outfit. I can't wait to wear it out soon."
    Man: "Looks nice. I can't wait to see you in it!"
    Forar wrote: »
    In reading articles (many linked on these very forums) about how women hate being approached at work, on the bus, at bars, at the gym, etc, etc, I think I began to internalize that nobody wants to be approached anywhere. I mean, obviously that's not the case, but even without being entirely oblivious, I think I just ended up defaulting to erring on the side of caution.

    "But I'm not a creepy asshole, and I think I have a better read on this situation... or maybe I don't..." is something I'd find myself second guessing in situations where maybe it might have been appropriate (or maybe just another negative story added to someones repertoire).

    I agree wholeheartedly with this. The takeaway I get from articles like these is that no woman wants to be approached anywhere, which obviously can't be true, but if you want to date then you have to risk giving someone unwanted attention.

    I will say my situation is a bit different in that I've often been told I'm good-looking and have had some women actually approach me to ask me out. The first time was the first woman I ever went out with, the second time a friend told me that one of her friends wanted to get to know me, I turned down the third and fourth due to my social anxiety being too much to handle at the time, the fifth kept inviting me to visit her at work before saying she wanted to see a movie, the sixth asked me out all of a sudden while she as at work at a pizza place, and the seventh had an older woman tell me they were interested.

    In contrast I've only ever asked out three women, and when that first one I asked out ghosted me it really freaked me out because she was also a good friend of mine's sister, which made me worry I had ruined my relationship with him (for some reason, because of my social anxiety).

    You'd think this would make me more confident, but it makes me feel like my looks are false advertising, honestly!

    Hexmage-PA on
    Friend Code: 1590-5696-7916
    Friend Safari Type: Rock
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    I'm glad I'm out of the "game" as it were because the rules or guidelines seem a lot like calvinball and its not a huge shock this leaves people out in the cold, primarily men who are told "be assertive, but not too assertive, listen, but don't talk, but don't be passive."

    I mean I met my wife at work. Prior to that I'd been stood up several times from online dating sites and this was the early oughts.

    Well isn't that society in general? Be you but don't be a dick about it.

    You don't have to be assertive or whatever, you must just be comfortable in yourself and respectful of other people in order to get anywhere with flirting and not be a prick about it.

  • Steel AngelSteel Angel Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    Solar wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    I'm glad I'm out of the "game" as it were because the rules or guidelines seem a lot like calvinball and its not a huge shock this leaves people out in the cold, primarily men who are told "be assertive, but not too assertive, listen, but don't talk, but don't be passive."

    I mean I met my wife at work. Prior to that I'd been stood up several times from online dating sites and this was the early oughts.

    Well isn't that society in general? Be you but don't be a dick about it.

    You don't have to be assertive or whatever, you must just be comfortable in yourself and respectful of other people in order to get anywhere with flirting and not be a prick about it.

    The general gist is simple. Simple doesn't always mean easy though and a lot of people struggle with reading what's respectful versus what's overly cautious versus what's fine in some contexts but not in others.

    And you often don't learn without screwing this up or watching others screw it up which is about as fun as a nest of scorpions for people with social anxiety. Bonus points if one's family is from a different culture than where one lives or even just grew up in a place where the local culture was very different and advice from family is often useless.

    Steel Angel on
    Big Dookie wrote: »
    I found that tilting it doesn't work very well, and once I started jerking it, I got much better results.

    Steam Profile
    3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
    Gnome-Interruptus
  • silence1186silence1186 Character shields down! As a wingmanRegistered User regular
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    People who are not socially adept or find it hard and tiring to be socially adept are definitely going to struggle with arguably the most social of tasks, and I genuinely can't think of ways to get past that.

    1) therapy and professional help. Social dysfunction is a valid problem and nobody need be ashamed if they need professional help removing their barriers.

    2) experience. 20 year old me found it mystifying when a woman was or wasn’t interested, but 36-year-old me can see the difference in body language like night and day

    3) online dating. It comes with its own set of challenges to be sure, but it completely bypasses the “is it ok to ask this person out” problem which can be a huge barrier for some people.

    Two of my therapists (for anxiety and depression) told me getting a girlfriend might help with some of my issues, and genuinely didn't seem to understand that getting one in the first place was impossible because of said anxiety and depression.

    V wrote:
    Words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    I'm glad I'm out of the "game" as it were because the rules or guidelines seem a lot like calvinball and its not a huge shock this leaves people out in the cold, primarily men who are told "be assertive, but not too assertive, listen, but don't talk, but don't be passive."

    I mean I met my wife at work. Prior to that I'd been stood up several times from online dating sites and this was the early oughts.

    Well isn't that society in general? Be you but don't be a dick about it.

    You don't have to be assertive or whatever, you must just be comfortable in yourself and respectful of other people in order to get anywhere with flirting and not be a prick about it.

    But its all subjective is the thing. One persons don't be a dick is another persons too passive.

    Dating is entirely a subjective thing that we try and quantify. Like getting two peoples opinions on what "raining" means. Sure at first it seems simple if two people agree, but that's not always the case. As is dating, ask what someone means by someone being "too creepy" and the descriptions run the gamut.

    As I said I'm glad I'm long married, I don't envy people trying to come together in the era of instagram, facebook, and the twitters.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    bowenIncenjucarDisruptedCapitalistGnome-InterruptusLord_AsmodeusSmrtnikZonugalnever die
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    17% of one age bracket saying something either "always or usually" means something isn't massively compelling. It's undoubtedly more than it used to be, but even withing that 17% you can imagine a gulf of difference for some values of 'usually'.

    I think that it's is very significant, in part because it's the age bracket that's probably most likely to be dating.

    Basically, for 1 in 5 people between 18 and 29, "Hey, would you like to go get some drinks?" has a pretty good chance at being sexual harassment. I mean, say someone walking out of a class asks that to a fellow student. My thought had been that that would be that that's fine, the person being asked can just decline, and no harm no foul. But if the person being asked or one of the witnesses is one of those 1 in 5 who thinks that that's harassment, then things get awkward. If you take the position that sexual harassment should be reported when it occurs (I think that it should), and you take the position that sexual harassment should be investigated when reported (again, I think that it should), then the logical conclusion is that the person doing the asking should be investigated for sexual harassment.

    At that point, I assume that the investigation would probably find that the asking party hasn't done anything beyond the pale, and at worst they would get sternly told to not make overtures like that on school property. Probably. But what I'm getting at is that I don't think that 17% is too small a a group to be dismissed. For something that could lead to a sexual harassment complaint, 17% is huge. If it had said that 17% of people think that people who ask to hug coworkers are always or usually sexually harassing them, that wouldn't shock me or concern me. I'd be like "Yep, totally, I get that." But asking someone out for drinks? Again, it's basically 1 in 5.

    No, what would happen is that report would land on the desk of a compliance officer who would find it obviously bogus

    There seems to be this cohort of men who live in mortal fear of being accused of harassment; while I guess I can understand why given the increasing publicization of such reports... the bar to face an actual sanction (even in a campus environment where there’s more attention/enforcement) is pretty high. Like, just don’t be a ridiculously aggressive creep! Should be easy.

    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
    AngelHedgieBlameless Cleric
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    17% of one age bracket saying something either "always or usually" means something isn't massively compelling. It's undoubtedly more than it used to be, but even withing that 17% you can imagine a gulf of difference for some values of 'usually'.

    I think that it's is very significant, in part because it's the age bracket that's probably most likely to be dating.

    Basically, for 1 in 5 people between 18 and 29, "Hey, would you like to go get some drinks?" has a pretty good chance at being sexual harassment. I mean, say someone walking out of a class asks that to a fellow student. My thought had been that that would be that that's fine, the person being asked can just decline, and no harm no foul. But if the person being asked or one of the witnesses is one of those 1 in 5 who thinks that that's harassment, then things get awkward. If you take the position that sexual harassment should be reported when it occurs (I think that it should), and you take the position that sexual harassment should be investigated when reported (again, I think that it should), then the logical conclusion is that the person doing the asking should be investigated for sexual harassment.

    At that point, I assume that the investigation would probably find that the asking party hasn't done anything beyond the pale, and at worst they would get sternly told to not make overtures like that on school property. Probably. But what I'm getting at is that I don't think that 17% is too small a a group to be dismissed. For something that could lead to a sexual harassment complaint, 17% is huge. If it had said that 17% of people think that people who ask to hug coworkers are always or usually sexually harassing them, that wouldn't shock me or concern me. I'd be like "Yep, totally, I get that." But asking someone out for drinks? Again, it's basically 1 in 5.

    No, what would happen is that report would land on the desk of a compliance officer who would find it obviously bogus

    There seems to be this cohort of men who live in mortal fear of being accused of harassment; while I guess I can understand why given the increasing publicization of such reports... the bar to face an actual sanction (even in a campus environment where there’s more attention/enforcement) is pretty high. Like, just don’t be a ridiculously aggressive creep! Should be easy.

    Official sanction sure. But we live in the era of the online shame. Where someone can slander your reputation with a few errant key strokes.

    Which is not to say the fear is entirely real, and like statistically the chance of asking out one person and having them out you online as the worst thing in the world is low, but that doesn't mean you feel like a winner when it happens to you.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    Kana
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    I'm glad I'm out of the "game" as it were because the rules or guidelines seem a lot like calvinball and its not a huge shock this leaves people out in the cold, primarily men who are told "be assertive, but not too assertive, listen, but don't talk, but don't be passive."

    I mean I met my wife at work. Prior to that I'd been stood up several times from online dating sites and this was the early oughts.

    Well isn't that society in general? Be you but don't be a dick about it.

    You don't have to be assertive or whatever, you must just be comfortable in yourself and respectful of other people in order to get anywhere with flirting and not be a prick about it.

    But its all subjective is the thing. One persons don't be a dick is another persons too passive.

    Dating is entirely a subjective thing that we try and quantify. Like getting two peoples opinions on what "raining" means. Sure at first it seems simple if two people agree, but that's not always the case. As is dating, ask what someone means by someone being "too creepy" and the descriptions run the gamut.

    As I said I'm glad I'm long married, I don't envy people trying to come together in the era of instagram, facebook, and the twitters.

    "Creepy" is a fun one because it's so open ended. I've heard it from everything of guys being actual gross individuals with how they're acting all the way to the ugly kid in school is looking at me that's creepy.

    Ladies.
    Steel AngelPreacherdispatch.oShadowhopeKristmas KthulhuKanaAridholMrVyngaardFeralGnome-InterruptusLord_AsmodeusSmrtnikRoz
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    People who are not socially adept or find it hard and tiring to be socially adept are definitely going to struggle with arguably the most social of tasks, and I genuinely can't think of ways to get past that.

    1) therapy and professional help. Social dysfunction is a valid problem and nobody need be ashamed if they need professional help removing their barriers.

    2) experience. 20 year old me found it mystifying when a woman was or wasn’t interested, but 36-year-old me can see the difference in body language like night and day

    3) online dating. It comes with its own set of challenges to be sure, but it completely bypasses the “is it ok to ask this person out” problem which can be a huge barrier for some people.

    Two of my therapists (for anxiety and depression) told me getting a girlfriend might help with some of my issues, and genuinely didn't seem to understand that getting one in the first place was impossible because of said anxiety and depression.

    I ran into this problem from probably 15 to 25.

    It’s a gateless gate problem.

    It’s like telling someone to just walk across a swinging bridge with fear of heights. Yeah that would be an easy solution but if I could do that I wouldn't be sitting in front of this bridge for two hours.

    And a lot of times people would say something like “ you are an attractive guy” or whatever, which is just like telling the guy in front of the bridge they have feet.

    One thing I found helpful, and I don’t put this forward as good advice because it probably isn’t, was that I went to a strip club in off hours, like 6 in the afternoon or something like that, when dancers would be there but not busy. Getting the concept that attractive women could possibly be interested in and comfortable with coming up and talking to or physically touching me, even if it was in the context of a business exchange, was a huge step for me. I know that sounds sad but whatever.

    Smrtnik
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    17% of one age bracket saying something either "always or usually" means something isn't massively compelling. It's undoubtedly more than it used to be, but even withing that 17% you can imagine a gulf of difference for some values of 'usually'.

    I think that it's is very significant, in part because it's the age bracket that's probably most likely to be dating.

    Basically, for 1 in 5 people between 18 and 29, "Hey, would you like to go get some drinks?" has a pretty good chance at being sexual harassment. I mean, say someone walking out of a class asks that to a fellow student. My thought had been that that would be that that's fine, the person being asked can just decline, and no harm no foul. But if the person being asked or one of the witnesses is one of those 1 in 5 who thinks that that's harassment, then things get awkward. If you take the position that sexual harassment should be reported when it occurs (I think that it should), and you take the position that sexual harassment should be investigated when reported (again, I think that it should), then the logical conclusion is that the person doing the asking should be investigated for sexual harassment.

    At that point, I assume that the investigation would probably find that the asking party hasn't done anything beyond the pale, and at worst they would get sternly told to not make overtures like that on school property. Probably. But what I'm getting at is that I don't think that 17% is too small a a group to be dismissed. For something that could lead to a sexual harassment complaint, 17% is huge. If it had said that 17% of people think that people who ask to hug coworkers are always or usually sexually harassing them, that wouldn't shock me or concern me. I'd be like "Yep, totally, I get that." But asking someone out for drinks? Again, it's basically 1 in 5.

    No, what would happen is that report would land on the desk of a compliance officer who would find it obviously bogus

    There seems to be this cohort of men who live in mortal fear of being accused of harassment; while I guess I can understand why given the increasing publicization of such reports... the bar to face an actual sanction (even in a campus environment where there’s more attention/enforcement) is pretty high. Like, just don’t be a ridiculously aggressive creep! Should be easy.

    Official sanction sure. But we live in the era of the online shame. Where someone can slander your reputation with a few errant key strokes.

    Which is not to say the fear is entirely real, and like statistically the chance of asking out one person and having them out you online as the worst thing in the world is low, but that doesn't mean you feel like a winner when it happens to you.

    I guess, but it’s still a stupid thing to be worried about; like how likely is it, and how inconsequential?

    You might as well never go outside for fear of being hit by lightning. If you’re that risk averse I guess there’s no use arguing about it, but good luck with that lifestyle

    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
    AngelHedgie
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    Preacher wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    17% of one age bracket saying something either "always or usually" means something isn't massively compelling. It's undoubtedly more than it used to be, but even withing that 17% you can imagine a gulf of difference for some values of 'usually'.

    I think that it's is very significant, in part because it's the age bracket that's probably most likely to be dating.

    Basically, for 1 in 5 people between 18 and 29, "Hey, would you like to go get some drinks?" has a pretty good chance at being sexual harassment. I mean, say someone walking out of a class asks that to a fellow student. My thought had been that that would be that that's fine, the person being asked can just decline, and no harm no foul. But if the person being asked or one of the witnesses is one of those 1 in 5 who thinks that that's harassment, then things get awkward. If you take the position that sexual harassment should be reported when it occurs (I think that it should), and you take the position that sexual harassment should be investigated when reported (again, I think that it should), then the logical conclusion is that the person doing the asking should be investigated for sexual harassment.

    At that point, I assume that the investigation would probably find that the asking party hasn't done anything beyond the pale, and at worst they would get sternly told to not make overtures like that on school property. Probably. But what I'm getting at is that I don't think that 17% is too small a a group to be dismissed. For something that could lead to a sexual harassment complaint, 17% is huge. If it had said that 17% of people think that people who ask to hug coworkers are always or usually sexually harassing them, that wouldn't shock me or concern me. I'd be like "Yep, totally, I get that." But asking someone out for drinks? Again, it's basically 1 in 5.

    No, what would happen is that report would land on the desk of a compliance officer who would find it obviously bogus

    There seems to be this cohort of men who live in mortal fear of being accused of harassment; while I guess I can understand why given the increasing publicization of such reports... the bar to face an actual sanction (even in a campus environment where there’s more attention/enforcement) is pretty high. Like, just don’t be a ridiculously aggressive creep! Should be easy.

    Official sanction sure. But we live in the era of the online shame. Where someone can slander your reputation with a few errant key strokes.

    Which is not to say the fear is entirely real, and like statistically the chance of asking out one person and having them out you online as the worst thing in the world is low, but that doesn't mean you feel like a winner when it happens to you.

    I guess, but it’s still a stupid thing to be worried about; like how likely is it, and how inconsequential?

    You might as well never go outside for fear of being hit by lightning. If you’re that risk averse I guess there’s no use arguing about it, but good luck with that lifestyle

    Schools have their own little mini-"legal" system. Even if you've been acquitted of a crime or found not guilty, the school can expel you for whatever reason they deem fit if they think it's beneficial to them and violates their code of conduct. It's a thing, and it happens fairly regularly.

    bowen on
    Ladies.
  • So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    bowen wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    17% of one age bracket saying something either "always or usually" means something isn't massively compelling. It's undoubtedly more than it used to be, but even withing that 17% you can imagine a gulf of difference for some values of 'usually'.

    I think that it's is very significant, in part because it's the age bracket that's probably most likely to be dating.

    Basically, for 1 in 5 people between 18 and 29, "Hey, would you like to go get some drinks?" has a pretty good chance at being sexual harassment. I mean, say someone walking out of a class asks that to a fellow student. My thought had been that that would be that that's fine, the person being asked can just decline, and no harm no foul. But if the person being asked or one of the witnesses is one of those 1 in 5 who thinks that that's harassment, then things get awkward. If you take the position that sexual harassment should be reported when it occurs (I think that it should), and you take the position that sexual harassment should be investigated when reported (again, I think that it should), then the logical conclusion is that the person doing the asking should be investigated for sexual harassment.

    At that point, I assume that the investigation would probably find that the asking party hasn't done anything beyond the pale, and at worst they would get sternly told to not make overtures like that on school property. Probably. But what I'm getting at is that I don't think that 17% is too small a a group to be dismissed. For something that could lead to a sexual harassment complaint, 17% is huge. If it had said that 17% of people think that people who ask to hug coworkers are always or usually sexually harassing them, that wouldn't shock me or concern me. I'd be like "Yep, totally, I get that." But asking someone out for drinks? Again, it's basically 1 in 5.

    No, what would happen is that report would land on the desk of a compliance officer who would find it obviously bogus

    There seems to be this cohort of men who live in mortal fear of being accused of harassment; while I guess I can understand why given the increasing publicization of such reports... the bar to face an actual sanction (even in a campus environment where there’s more attention/enforcement) is pretty high. Like, just don’t be a ridiculously aggressive creep! Should be easy.

    Official sanction sure. But we live in the era of the online shame. Where someone can slander your reputation with a few errant key strokes.

    Which is not to say the fear is entirely real, and like statistically the chance of asking out one person and having them out you online as the worst thing in the world is low, but that doesn't mean you feel like a winner when it happens to you.

    I guess, but it’s still a stupid thing to be worried about; like how likely is it, and how inconsequential?

    You might as well never go outside for fear of being hit by lightning. If you’re that risk averse I guess there’s no use arguing about it, but good luck with that lifestyle

    Schools have their own little mini-"legal" system. Even if you've been acquitted of a crime or found not guilty, the school can expel you for whatever reason they deem fit if they think it's beneficial to them and violates their code of conduct. It's a thing, and it happens fairly regularly.

    Show me some stats that students are expelled fairly regularly for sexual misconduct?

    Because from what I know it's very very rare.

    Hahnsoo1AngelHedgiekimeDouglasDangerIrukaMazzyxShawnaseeLord_AsmodeusBrainleechZonugalnever die
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    So It Goes wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    17% of one age bracket saying something either "always or usually" means something isn't massively compelling. It's undoubtedly more than it used to be, but even withing that 17% you can imagine a gulf of difference for some values of 'usually'.

    I think that it's is very significant, in part because it's the age bracket that's probably most likely to be dating.

    Basically, for 1 in 5 people between 18 and 29, "Hey, would you like to go get some drinks?" has a pretty good chance at being sexual harassment. I mean, say someone walking out of a class asks that to a fellow student. My thought had been that that would be that that's fine, the person being asked can just decline, and no harm no foul. But if the person being asked or one of the witnesses is one of those 1 in 5 who thinks that that's harassment, then things get awkward. If you take the position that sexual harassment should be reported when it occurs (I think that it should), and you take the position that sexual harassment should be investigated when reported (again, I think that it should), then the logical conclusion is that the person doing the asking should be investigated for sexual harassment.

    At that point, I assume that the investigation would probably find that the asking party hasn't done anything beyond the pale, and at worst they would get sternly told to not make overtures like that on school property. Probably. But what I'm getting at is that I don't think that 17% is too small a a group to be dismissed. For something that could lead to a sexual harassment complaint, 17% is huge. If it had said that 17% of people think that people who ask to hug coworkers are always or usually sexually harassing them, that wouldn't shock me or concern me. I'd be like "Yep, totally, I get that." But asking someone out for drinks? Again, it's basically 1 in 5.

    No, what would happen is that report would land on the desk of a compliance officer who would find it obviously bogus

    There seems to be this cohort of men who live in mortal fear of being accused of harassment; while I guess I can understand why given the increasing publicization of such reports... the bar to face an actual sanction (even in a campus environment where there’s more attention/enforcement) is pretty high. Like, just don’t be a ridiculously aggressive creep! Should be easy.

    Official sanction sure. But we live in the era of the online shame. Where someone can slander your reputation with a few errant key strokes.

    Which is not to say the fear is entirely real, and like statistically the chance of asking out one person and having them out you online as the worst thing in the world is low, but that doesn't mean you feel like a winner when it happens to you.

    I guess, but it’s still a stupid thing to be worried about; like how likely is it, and how inconsequential?

    You might as well never go outside for fear of being hit by lightning. If you’re that risk averse I guess there’s no use arguing about it, but good luck with that lifestyle

    Schools have their own little mini-"legal" system. Even if you've been acquitted of a crime or found not guilty, the school can expel you for whatever reason they deem fit if they think it's beneficial to them and violates their code of conduct. It's a thing, and it happens fairly regularly.

    Show me some stats that students are expelled fairly regularly for sexual misconduct?

    Because from what I know it's very very rare.

    I didn't say just for sexual misconduct.

    Ladies.
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    17% of one age bracket saying something either "always or usually" means something isn't massively compelling. It's undoubtedly more than it used to be, but even withing that 17% you can imagine a gulf of difference for some values of 'usually'.

    I think that it's is very significant, in part because it's the age bracket that's probably most likely to be dating.

    Basically, for 1 in 5 people between 18 and 29, "Hey, would you like to go get some drinks?" has a pretty good chance at being sexual harassment. I mean, say someone walking out of a class asks that to a fellow student. My thought had been that that would be that that's fine, the person being asked can just decline, and no harm no foul. But if the person being asked or one of the witnesses is one of those 1 in 5 who thinks that that's harassment, then things get awkward. If you take the position that sexual harassment should be reported when it occurs (I think that it should), and you take the position that sexual harassment should be investigated when reported (again, I think that it should), then the logical conclusion is that the person doing the asking should be investigated for sexual harassment.

    At that point, I assume that the investigation would probably find that the asking party hasn't done anything beyond the pale, and at worst they would get sternly told to not make overtures like that on school property. Probably. But what I'm getting at is that I don't think that 17% is too small a a group to be dismissed. For something that could lead to a sexual harassment complaint, 17% is huge. If it had said that 17% of people think that people who ask to hug coworkers are always or usually sexually harassing them, that wouldn't shock me or concern me. I'd be like "Yep, totally, I get that." But asking someone out for drinks? Again, it's basically 1 in 5.

    No, what would happen is that report would land on the desk of a compliance officer who would find it obviously bogus

    There seems to be this cohort of men who live in mortal fear of being accused of harassment; while I guess I can understand why given the increasing publicization of such reports... the bar to face an actual sanction (even in a campus environment where there’s more attention/enforcement) is pretty high. Like, just don’t be a ridiculously aggressive creep! Should be easy.

    Official sanction sure. But we live in the era of the online shame. Where someone can slander your reputation with a few errant key strokes.

    Which is not to say the fear is entirely real, and like statistically the chance of asking out one person and having them out you online as the worst thing in the world is low, but that doesn't mean you feel like a winner when it happens to you.

    I guess, but it’s still a stupid thing to be worried about; like how likely is it, and how inconsequential?

    You might as well never go outside for fear of being hit by lightning. If you’re that risk averse I guess there’s no use arguing about it, but good luck with that lifestyle

    The irrational nature of a fear doesn't make it not a fear though. Amplify that by the internet being able to confirm your biases and fears, and there you are, the fear is real, or as real as anything else. And unlike lightning strikes, social interactions are everywhere at all times, and the perception of their pitfalls ever present.

    For the most part we're a social species, we have advanced as a society do to that, and most of us want to find a partner, a spouse, someone who cares, and yet thousands of years of interactions and we still can't tell you how to say hello to someone you want to get to know better consistently.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    KanaGnome-Interruptus
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    I know! I was tangentially involved in the administration of the one at my undergrad uni

    And I’m saying, you can do (and even get reported for) a lot of really creepy bullshit before a university will even try to get you in a room, nevermind taking concrete action. People act like there’s this hyper-aggressive enforcement of harassment claims, when if anything the opposite is true

    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
    So It GoesIncenjucarDouglasDangernever die
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    I know! I was tangentially involved in the administration of the one at my undergrad uni

    And I’m saying, you can do (and even get reported for) a lot of really creepy bullshit before a university will even try to get you in a room, nevermind taking concrete action. People act like there’s this hyper-aggressive enforcement of harassment claims, when if anything the opposite is true

    A lot of it seems centered around criminal but I am having a real hard time actually finding legit statistics from schools that aren't just estimates and high school nonsense.

    Ladies.
  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    I've managed to lead a reasonably successful life, dating-wise, and even got married despite a great deal of social anxiety, mostly through concentrated effort of will and drinking.

    That said, the fact that we, as a species or at least as a society, have yet to settle on some kind of hand-signal for "Want to begin engaging in romantic behavior?" "Yes / no / uncertain but I don't want you to go away from me yet" and instead maintain the awkward, vague dance of missed signals and stilted conversation we've got baffles me. Courtship is a process almost every member of our society goes through at least once and a vanishingly small percentage of them don't find it confusing and anxiety-inducing yet we all for some reason have agreed to pretend it's not weird.

    CptHamilton on
    PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
    PreacherbowenForar
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    I've managed to lead a reasonably successful life, dating-wise and even got married despite a great deal of social anxiety, mostly through concentrated effort of will and drinking.

    That said, the fact that we, as a species or at least as a society, have yet to settle on some kind of hand-signal for "Want to begin engaging in romantic behavior?" "Yes / no / uncertain but I don't want you to go away from me yet" and instead maintain the awkward, vague dance of missed signals and stilted conversation we've got baffles me. Courtship is a process almost every member of our society goes through at least once and a vanishingly small percentage of them don't find it confusing and anxiety-inducing yet we all for some reason have agreed to pretend it's not weird.

    I had to even ask my wife if we were on a date on our first date. I was so afraid at the time the answer would be no. And yet I tell people that and they go "oh that's so bad why did you do that?" and its like "because I had to know!" I mean relying on peoples social signals when most of the time people will have multiple signals for a variety of situations is maddening.

    Its actually kind of surprising humanity has managed to make it this far.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    CptHamiltonbowenLanlaornDisruptedCapitalistPLASmrtnikShazkar Shadowstorm
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    I've managed to lead a reasonably successful life, dating-wise, and even got married despite a great deal of social anxiety, mostly through concentrated effort of will and drinking.

    That said, the fact that we, as a species or at least as a society, have yet to settle on some kind of hand-signal for "Want to begin engaging in romantic behavior?" "Yes / no / uncertain but I don't want you to go away from me yet" and instead maintain the awkward, vague dance of missed signals and stilted conversation we've got baffles me. Courtship is a process almost every member of our society goes through at least once and a vanishingly small percentage of them don't find it confusing and anxiety-inducing yet we all for some reason have agreed to pretend it's not weird.

    Maybe it's time to bring back fan signal language from back in the day.

    Ladies.
    KanaCalicaFry
  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    I've managed to lead a reasonably successful life, dating-wise and even got married despite a great deal of social anxiety, mostly through concentrated effort of will and drinking.

    That said, the fact that we, as a species or at least as a society, have yet to settle on some kind of hand-signal for "Want to begin engaging in romantic behavior?" "Yes / no / uncertain but I don't want you to go away from me yet" and instead maintain the awkward, vague dance of missed signals and stilted conversation we've got baffles me. Courtship is a process almost every member of our society goes through at least once and a vanishingly small percentage of them don't find it confusing and anxiety-inducing yet we all for some reason have agreed to pretend it's not weird.

    I had to even ask my wife if we were on a date on our first date. I was so afraid at the time the answer would be no. And yet I tell people that and they go "oh that's so bad why did you do that?" and its like "because I had to know!" I mean relying on peoples social signals when most of the time people will have multiple signals for a variety of situations is maddening.

    Its actually kind of surprising humanity has managed to make it this far.

    My wife got me to put my head in her lap while we were hanging out on the couch and spent several years telling people about how I then asked her if that meant she liked me because I really didn't want to be incorrect in my assumption.

    PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
    PreacherShawnaseeFrynever dieAegis
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    Preacher wrote: »
    I've managed to lead a reasonably successful life, dating-wise and even got married despite a great deal of social anxiety, mostly through concentrated effort of will and drinking.

    That said, the fact that we, as a species or at least as a society, have yet to settle on some kind of hand-signal for "Want to begin engaging in romantic behavior?" "Yes / no / uncertain but I don't want you to go away from me yet" and instead maintain the awkward, vague dance of missed signals and stilted conversation we've got baffles me. Courtship is a process almost every member of our society goes through at least once and a vanishingly small percentage of them don't find it confusing and anxiety-inducing yet we all for some reason have agreed to pretend it's not weird.

    I had to even ask my wife if we were on a date on our first date. I was so afraid at the time the answer would be no. And yet I tell people that and they go "oh that's so bad why did you do that?" and its like "because I had to know!" I mean relying on peoples social signals when most of the time people will have multiple signals for a variety of situations is maddening.

    Its actually kind of surprising humanity has managed to make it this far.

    My wife got me to put my head in her lap while we were hanging out on the couch and spent several years telling people about how I then asked her if that meant she liked me because I really didn't want to be incorrect in my assumption.

    I've had people who were clearly flirting with me end up not actually be flirting with me because they used touch more than most people did. There's no clear cut way to read nonverbal cues because they're different for everyone, especially depending on their love-langauge.

    bowen on
    Ladies.
    PreacherCptHamiltonkimeDongs GaloreKristmas KthulhuKanaMrVyngaardGnome-InterruptusLord_AsmodeusTicaldfjamSmrtnikZonugalHacksawnever die
  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    I hear often that men are more likely to think someone is interested in them than women are. I guess that's because men are in the pursuer role and are always looking for an opening.

    Friend Code: 1590-5696-7916
    Friend Safari Type: Rock
  • KruiteKruite Registered User regular
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    I hear often that men are more likely to think someone is interested in them than women are. I guess that's because men are in the pursuer role and are always looking for an opening.

    that's one hell of a generalization with one hell of an assumption to explain it

    CptHamiltonI ZimbraElvenshaeIrukaKanaMrVyngaardGnome-Interruptusnever die
  • Steel AngelSteel Angel Registered User regular
    I've managed to lead a reasonably successful life, dating-wise, and even got married despite a great deal of social anxiety, mostly through concentrated effort of will and drinking.

    That said, the fact that we, as a species or at least as a society, have yet to settle on some kind of hand-signal for "Want to begin engaging in romantic behavior?" "Yes / no / uncertain but I don't want you to go away from me yet" and instead maintain the awkward, vague dance of missed signals and stilted conversation we've got baffles me. Courtship is a process almost every member of our society goes through at least once and a vanishingly small percentage of them don't find it confusing and anxiety-inducing yet we all for some reason have agreed to pretend it's not weird.

    Part of the problem is that enough people take rejection badly and reveal themselves as geese which is enough to dissuade many people giving definitive no answers to that kind of thing. People are the problem as usual.

    The other is that what we view as normal dating behavior is still really new in the grand scheme of things. Even once we mostly got past the "Well I'm engaged to a someone I barely know in order to strength the alliance with France" stage in most of the world it still had a more transactional quality even in the states for a long time even into the 20th century. It used to be common for dudes to knock on the door of a new neighbor with an eligible daughter and for said daughter to be open to that idea because getting married was likely the only way for her to move out of her parents' place.

    Big Dookie wrote: »
    I found that tilting it doesn't work very well, and once I started jerking it, I got much better results.

    Steam Profile
    3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
    PreacherbowenIncenjucarPLASmrtnik
  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    I hear often that men are more likely to think someone is interested in them than women are. I guess that's because men are in the pursuer role and are always looking for an opening.

    I think it's less that men are always looking for an opening and more that the way we raise boys teaches them to expect brusqueness and impersonality and that, when they do get around to trying to meet a partner, they should expect to be rejected a lot and that they need to "recognize the signals" that someone is interested.

    Then when someone they find attractive is nice to them in ways that other boys generally are not - because we raise young women with the expectation that they should act caring and friendly all of the time - they interpret what the woman is intending to be "friendly but not romantically interested interaction" as "signal she likes me, too".

    PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
    PreacherMeeqeKanaSiskaGnome-Interruptus
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    I've managed to lead a reasonably successful life, dating-wise, and even got married despite a great deal of social anxiety, mostly through concentrated effort of will and drinking.

    That said, the fact that we, as a species or at least as a society, have yet to settle on some kind of hand-signal for "Want to begin engaging in romantic behavior?" "Yes / no / uncertain but I don't want you to go away from me yet" and instead maintain the awkward, vague dance of missed signals and stilted conversation we've got baffles me. Courtship is a process almost every member of our society goes through at least once and a vanishingly small percentage of them don't find it confusing and anxiety-inducing yet we all for some reason have agreed to pretend it's not weird.

    Part of the problem is that enough people take rejection badly and reveal themselves as geese which is enough to dissuade many people giving definitive no answers to that kind of thing. People are the problem as usual.

    The other is that what we view as normal dating behavior is still really new in the grand scheme of things. Even once we mostly got past the "Well I'm engaged to a someone I barely know in order to strength the alliance with France" stage in most of the world it still had a more transactional quality even in the states for a long time even into the 20th century. It used to be common for dudes to knock on the door of a new neighbor with an eligible daughter and for said daughter to be open to that idea because getting married was likely the only way for her to move out of her parents' place.

    Indeed, the OVERWHELMING human history of romance is transactional. You'd be paired up by your parents, given a bit more or a bit less say depending on how your parents wanted to be with you, but effectively your parents would always be the gatekeepers who would go and find potential partners for you. That is the human 'mating dance', we just had the parents do it. Now, thats not a great way to do things, but its the way we were familiar with for almost all of our history.

    In the modern world, I'm far from an expert on dating but I have had success in two ways.

    1) If dating online, read the womans profile and study her shared pictures carefully. Send her a personalized message with hooks for potential discussions about things she has shared information about. Show her that you are interested in her activities, job, and interests. This will make you rise above the herd who are just saying, "Wassup, wanna cyber? Phwooar!". You will be judged on your looks too, but showing that you are interested in her and took the time to write her a real message will help.

    2) If you are meeting people in the real world. Forget about dating ENTIRELY, and focus on being your best self and learning about the people you meet. The less you think about dating, the more likely you are to meet friends, and regardless of what people like to say women actually like to date their friends. But don't plan to make friends to get dates. Friendship is valuable in its own right.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    I wouldn't say that's true. The idea that marriages have always been arranged is simply not the case in large swathes of places across history. Your parents typically would want you to marry someone who is going to be a good spouse, which is not dissimilar to now. Your marriage was only arranged in many places if it was significant, and it was significant if it was dynastic and/or involved property which for the majority means it isn't.

    There was more parental influence than there is now, but it wasn't purely transactional by any means. People married for love, did it all the time. People met at festivals, liked each other, danced, shacked up together, there you go you're married, common law spouse.

    Solar on
    shrykeAridholFANTOMASZonugal
  • ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    1) If dating online, read the womans profile and study her shared pictures carefully. Send her a personalized message with hooks for potential discussions about things she has shared information about. Show her that you are interested in her activities, job, and interests. This will make you rise above the herd who are just saying, "Wassup, wanna cyber? Phwooar!". You will be judged on your looks too, but showing that you are interested in her and took the time to write her a real message will help.

    While you did note that this worked *for you*, it's worth noting that it is also a time consuming effort that can lead to weeks or months of work and nothing to show of it. I know, that was me. It's not like I was running CSI forensics on their pics, profile, and everything I could find about them on Google, but even just a few lines asking about X pic, Y mutual interest, and Z hook found in their profile can still take considerable effort across countless hours, with nothing to show for it.

    Note; of course, nobody owes me (or anyone) shit, but I'm more trying to point out that like all things dating and thus hyper subjective, there can be flip sides to even techniques and tactics that proved workable in some or even many circumstances.

    Maybe my pics needed to be better, maybe my profile (despite using the suggestions from the dating thread here) could've used a bit of shoring up, but as I mentioned above, it can be soul crushing to send out hundreds, if not thousands of messages across weeks and months, to get nothing but silence back. Sometimes a 'thanks but no thanks' message, which was actually kind of nice, as I know many women who go with even gentle rejection often receive a blistering tirade of bullshit back (I always politely thanked them and wished them well in their search), but it wears on you. Or at least, it did for me. It's not easy to get home from work, fire up a search for people with similar interests and appealing profiles, and craft individual messages for each of them that 99% of the time won't get a response, if they're even read at all.

    Many women (in the area at least) would include some note to not just say Hi, or be lazy, and also called out obvious copy/paste efforts in this, but you know what? I kind of understand that approach. It would have saved me literally weeks, if not months of my life, to not spend all that time individually crafting greetings, trying to 'stand out from the herd' and still end up in the deleted conversations folder.

    Matching apps like Tinder or Bumble remove that effort; you can't say shit until there's a connection, but at the same time, it's not easy to flip through hundreds or thousands of profiles with zero matches. It can be a bit of a blow to ones confidence to not even be given the chance to say Hi. At which point, if we're (societally) not really doing introductions in person anymore, and dating is a barren hellscape, it can kind of feel helpless.

    Living in a city of millions, but apparently lost between the cracks.

    Yes, sure, as I said, I've read the dating thread, I'm aware that the onus is on us to grow as people, pick up hobbies and join groups and get out there, but I guess what I'm saying is that I empathize with those who don't just find it frustrating, but hurtful. We all throw around trite cliches about being confident, but I think there's room to recognize that yeah, it kinda fucking sucks some of the time too.

    So, to circle back around, yeah, personalized effort may improve ones chances, but a fifty percent increase on what feel like negligible odds is still just 'squat and a half'.

    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
    Steel AngelMrMisterKayne Red RobeGnome-Interruptus
  • Inkstain82Inkstain82 Registered User regular
    The most effective predictor of online response rate is relative equality of attractiveness between sender and receiver. I’m on my phone but I can dig up the studies later if anyone wants to see them.

    It’s possible for someone to have a different problem, but that’s generally a really safe bet for the explanation when they have extremely low response rate.

    Most of people in general’s frustration with online dating comes from the fact that the average message from either gender is sent to a recipient rated ~20% more attractive than the sender. We get greedy and self-delusional when faced with a buffet of choices.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    The most effective predictor of online response rate is relative equality of attractiveness between sender and receiver. I’m on my phone but I can dig up the studies later if anyone wants to see them.

    It’s possible for someone to have a different problem, but that’s generally a really safe bet for the explanation when they have extremely low response rate.

    Most of people in general’s frustration with online dating comes from the fact that the average message from either gender is sent to a recipient rated ~20% more attractive than the sender. We get greedy and self-delusional when faced with a buffet of choices.

    And who decided what is 20% more attractive than they are? Like I know people in theory rate each other on numbers those aren't like set in stone.

    "ugly people should stick with ugly people" is kind of a really cynical pessimistic view on dating and relationships. Calling it greedy is also rather poor.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    AridholLord_AsmodeusZonugal
This discussion has been closed.