I am very old, and hence from the era when people dated. I agree with you that there was something about dating that, while harder at one level (I hated asking someone out for the first time) was much easier and clearer afterwards.
I think the informal system has an advantage in that it doesn't force you to be in the college dating equivalent of "spouse hunting mode" all the time. It's easier to avoid rigid and traditional expectiations of a relationship if you eschew the formal procedure for courting someone, and lets you just enjoy the relationship for what it is rather than worrying about it's "progression" or whatever.
However, for people who can't navigate the informal system so easily (such as myself most of the time), it does have it's drawbacks. Sometimes a predefined procedure can make things easier.
I don't know, I'm an introvert, completely not "gregarious and very, very, socially skilled", and it worked for me. In fact, it works better for loners, because loners are even less likely to express an interest in someone without having a reasonable relationship with them first. I guess it has a significant failure rate as well, though.
4: The problem with it for introverts is that it (statistically) depends on having an awfully big group of buddies. (Not always, given that it worked for you, of course.) In any bunch of friends a number are coupled up, some more are not attractive to you -- you need a social life that incorporates a lot of people to have much of a hope of hooking up this way. Which is great if you do, but tough if you don't.
I did a fair amount of the "hang out and just let it happen" in college, but if some nice guy I didn't really know asked me to do some fun activity--explore a park, visit a museum, go to a lecture, whatever--I almost always agreed. In at least a few cases, I ended up sleeping with or seriously dating some of them. However, these guys didn't manoeuvre through my pack of friends; they found me in class, at rehearsals, or in cafes, where I was probably easier to approach.
I think 6 illustrates one of the ways that dating was easier. The guys Jackmormon refers to did not have to make their way into her circle of friends before they could express an interest in her. If you are very shy like me, trying to break into a circle of friends is even harder than asking a woman on a date.
This is certainly the week of "Unfogged Posts About Things On Which I, A Lurker, Am Informed Enough To Have An Opinion And Am Thus Allured Into Posting", what with the shoes and the career women and all.
As someone whose immediate, Marlene Dietrich-in-Blue-Angel-style sex-appeal is near zero, I'm actually rather partial to the large groups/subsequent pairing. I don't think I'd ever get any dates at all if I depended on someone being smitten from across the room and calling me up for an old-fashioned date, whereas I've had sufficient if not excessive success by sparkling charmingly at people in group settings until they forget my lack of glamour.
Although at least in my social circle, there's a 2.5, and this may be key: after affinity has been noticed, one casually invites Object on the sort of outing that one might schedule with a regular friend. I mean, I go to coffee and movies and record-shopping with friends, as well as with Objects. Smooching sometimes ensues, usually after you've stayed up late enough to make work a living hell the next day.
After some years of this, I realized that I actually liked the fuss and the anxiety of this process, sometimes more than I liked the relationships that ensued.
If there were formal dates, how would they work? How would you know that you liked someone enough to ask them out? Just because they were all, you know, hott? I'm pretty seriously partnered at the moment, so I can kick away the ladder I climbed and accept a return to formal dates even on that basis, I guess.
Oh, they say something clever in class; you run into them at a party and have an entertaining conversation; you can run into someone enough to have an opinion of them without being in their social circle enough to do the "Whoops -- how'd we end up making out? Cool." routine.
And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the organic method of dating, not at all. Just that it heavily favors a particular personality, and so alternatives for the rest of us would be good.
I'm saying that both are okay, Timbot. Particularly if "date" means activity that is fun in itself, gets you out of the damn house, and no pressure for some specific sex act to follow.
In high school I also tried the stalker method, join the clubs she's in and go cheer her on at sporting events. This did not work but actually did get me into her circle of friends because her friends were at these events as well, so I got partway there- we ended up friends but nothing more.
11 --- I'm 36 and it sort of seemed to me in high school and college like it should be that way you're describing; but every time I ever attempted to make a pass at a female friend, it was either not noticed or else came off as way creepy/friendship-ending.
I have never gotten once laid through the organic method, unless you count the guy I had sex with in college, but even that organic effect had been preceded by some formality on his part months prior. If I count all times my options are open, I probably bat .900 or so through more formal approaches. I am shy, and I imagine more attractive when I can pitch my manner to an indivdual man, then move into group interactions that are sometimes uneasy for me.
It's difficult to have a large, casual social circle after college, that's true. I don't feel confident enough in some kind of empirical modernist history-writing to really assert this, but I suspect that the decrease in church/union/immigrant association type of culture is a big factor. I suspect this primarily because almost all of my relationships (and all the good ones) have evolved out of shared projects (er, activism...I am one of THOSE people). I would be totally lost even in Provincial Metropolis without this kind of large group--people whose ideas I share to some degree, people I spend time around week after week. It's also key that you don't actually know everyone in this large group super-well, and that you don't neccesssarily like some of them. That adds frisson, as it were. The nice thing about activism, too, is that the barrier to entry is pretty low--you just show up. And even in Provincial Metropolis, there's enough diversity among (left-wing) activists that you don't need to hang around with the creepy anarcho-primitivists or the Stalinists or even the miscellaneously poorly informed if you don't want to.
But then this method clearly doesn't work for everyone. (And the real catch is this--you get many more dates if you believe in the activism than if you're just trolling for relationships . Ergo, there's some limitation on effectiveness.)
I am disqualified from commenting here because of my basic philosophy of relationships, but I think that the contemporary system would have worked better for me than the system in place in my youth. It's a lot easier to hang out with a group than to ask for a date.
"The system in place in my youth": the two systems, actually. High school was the "Love Me Tender" Elvis System, and college was the "Why don't we do it in the road" Jim Morrison System.
Yes, I'm aware that that's a Beatles song. WIth the Beatles it was satire, but Morrison really believed that.
Actually, something I posted on my site a week or two ago is actually highly relevant to the "sleepover" question: sleepovers in Polynesia, Japan, and XIVc Italy.
Dude, moe totolo hasn't got anything to do with this sort of sleepovers. It's basically rape, with variations of "There's no socially acceptable way for the girl to consent, so she connives at it but can maintain deniability if caught" and "Well, once they've had sex, might as well get married. Rape schmape." Perhaps an interesting subject of discussion, but not strongly related.
I've a related question for the Mineshaft. Is it okay to ask a girl out while she's on the job (I'm thinking specifically of the food service industry here)?
My sense is that it's not, but my female friends say it is.
You have to be reasonably deft about it to not be putting her in a position where she's professionally obliged to be nice to you. Say, after you've already paid and tipped; not obviously in earshot of management. Nothing fundamentally wrong with it, you just have to watch that you aren't making it difficult for her to say no thanks if she wants to.
I'd say it's only ok if she has signalled fairly strongly that she's interested, and even then, under LB's conditions. And if you've misread the signals, it is your bad.
I've heard both versions of moetotolo. A guy from Micronesia told me that it often was by agreement with the girl and that sometimes the family approved (by cooking breakfast for the guy), if only ex post facto. Obviously this is one of the most controversial questions in anthropology.
31: Go with your female friends' advice. They're there. Just be polite about it; waitresses, bartenders, etc., get hit on all of the time, and most have a polite way of deflecting it. If you get the polite way, understand that it's not an indication that you need to renew your efforts with greater subtlety, but a "No."
The method LB describes always worked for me, have never done anything else. (No, I lie, I went on two dates with one boy when I was about 17 - we met through a mutual friend, but I didn't really like him, just went for the novelty value.) And I don't think I'm *that* gregarious or highly socially-skilled. I did get asked for my phone number once, by a bloke I'd just met, but he never phoned.
The trouble is with the more formal method is that it doesn't necessarily indicate romantic intent if you ask someone that you're already friends with to a film or exhibition. I think I may have unwittingly been the innocent friend who didn't notice any undercurrents on a couple of occasions.
I'd never really done anything like the 'formal' dating thing really until I met my wife.
Everything prior was, as I've discussed (at tedious and probably annoying length in other threads) just meeting people through friends or hooking up in a half-drunken way at parties, in bars or in clubs.
When I met my wife, I had to ask for her phone number as I knew there was no other way I'd see her again otherwise. And then we had to go on semi-formal dates as she was living near London and I was in Oxford. I found that all a bit stressful -- we got on well, obviously -- but travelling to another city for a 'date' just put way more pressure on the situation than I'm used to.
Is it okay to ask a girl out while she's on the job
Oh the glories of the differences in the language!
BTW, "I think of you as a brother" is the most evil and undermining thing it's possible to say. If you can't keep a straight face long enough to say "thanks, but no", then "Fuck off and die" is acceptable. But not the other thing.
One of the many fabulous things I discovered upon moving to the UK is that here, an amazingly large percentage of the population takes ecstacy on a semi-regular basis, at least into their mid-20s and for a lot of folks well into their 30s. (Seriously - there are loads of pretty straight Brits who wouldn't be drug takers in teh US, but take ecstasy here, 'cause it's such a part of the culture.)
If you're looking for a way to by-pass the social difficulties that LB mentions, getting everyone high on ecstacy once a month or so is a pretty solid solution. At that stage, 'Relax. Just be friendly. It happens naturally. Don't push it' is pretty much the reality.
Wouldn't work for true loners, of course, but for someone with a friend or two, who occasionally goes to clubs...
(However, I am a firm believer that if a you do allow your child to have a boyfriend/girlfriend sleep over, giving them ecstasy is taking things a step too far.)
However, these guys didn't manoeuvre through my pack of friends; they found me in class, at rehearsals, or in cafes, where I was probably easier to approach.
More approachable in a cafe? Let's face it: there is no good way for the shy/socially awkward/etc to make friends or "influence" people. This is why I think teo should relax: not because he'll end up getting any that way, but because why get one's undies in a twist over what's a bad situation to anyway? But I may be bitter because like LB, I am horrifically and painfully bad at this and related shit, but unlike her, I am not now happily paired off, much less to anyone with so manly a name as "Buck".
As far as I can tell, The Kid's mixed M/F, het/gay social group hangs out with each other in bunches and randomly in pairs, is somewhat fluid in its sexual orientation and does some "friends with benefits". Those who mate still hang out with the bunch, rather than going on conventional dates, as far as I can see. This may have more to do with their college-age status and the expense of dinner-and-a-movie in Los Angeles; it's cheaper to buy a pitcher of beer at a local hangout and play their iPods at each other.
Like Idealist, I am very old, but I was a geek grrl in HS and college, and not very socially adept. Looking back, I can see that I was getting hit on, but my complete inability to recognise that kind of strangled the opportunities to date. [Husband #1 hooked up with me only through his own persistence, which had more to do with his realising that I was exactly the woman to drive his parents into hysterics than anything else.]
Then I discovered other geeks, learnt how to socialise and lived happily ever after.
I met the Biophysicist online, and we can never have been said to have "dated" at all, unless naughty weekends can be counted as "dates". Living 2057 miles apart at the beginning may have had something to do with that.
B-wo, your whimsical contemtousness should do you quite well. I'm not kidding. If you were to say the things you write online to people in real life, I think you'd be quite popular. Except among sucky people, who would hate you, so avoid them.
I find the transition from whimsical contempt to hot make-outs somewhat to extremely difficult to effect, even when the targets of the two are different persons.
Actually, maybe that's been my problem. I should find someone with low self-esteem and continuously mock and insult her, and then suddenly turn around and act very sweetly, disarming her. Sort of rock the abusive jerk thing.
In all of these discussions it seems the key thing, in transitioning from near-permanent drought to 'oh my god, not more sex', is being able to tell when someone else is interested in you.
The sex life I had in my twenties was largely thanks to activism.
I'm a loner for the most part, so situations in my past where I've been in awkward-loner milieus were pretty good for me (for instance, when I was doing a Master's in philosophy in a city that had nothing else going on in it). The NYC "dating" scene is a horror. It's like going on fucking job interviews (literally and figuratively!). The fun of sex is, for me anyway, totally not worth the price of dating.
Approaching someone and going out on a pressure-laden date is so much more painful for me as an introvert than just getting drunk and hooking up with someone I've known for a while.
Ben (as a total stranger to you) I know you're only kidding about 50, but really, don't do this. Don't don't don't. Unless, that is, you want a really horribly entangling and painful involvement with the kind of woman who grew up liking/needing smart men to be really, really mean to her. (...er...not that this would be me in youth or anything) Women who like smart men to be smartishly mean at them are BAD bets. They're not even like the exciting-yet-troubled women who like men who are aggressive, macho jerks. (ie, the sex is not exceptionally hott as compensation for the horrible drama) (That is, I'm assuming that the vast majority of Unfogged posters are what I tend to think of as smart)
How about seeking out a woman with low self-esteem and joining with her in critiquing others, using your devastating wit? That worked for Significant Other, and while I may be no prize I am at least presentable.
Overlooking in high school or college what in retrospect were obvious clues, come-ons, and opportunities is not to be taken as a sign of social ineptitude. The charming commenters at Unfogged are ruining the currency by each claiming such.
I've a related question for the Mineshaft. Is it okay to ask a girl out while she's on the job (I'm thinking specifically of the food service industry here)?
Yes, I think so, even if you're using "food service industry" to imply "waitress that gets hit on all the time". Even people working in a highly social capacity where they get hit on by strangers all the time have standards; maybe you're different than the other guys that hit on her. (You probably are if you have to ask whether it's OK or not.)
I'm not really in the advice-giving business anymore, but as I understand it the general way to break out of a pattern is to change your behavior slightly, go against your regular inclinations. This is usually the advice given to women who want to (for example) stop dating smart guys who put them down. Your natural way of being is so automatic and comfortable that you have to actively be thinking, "this is what I always do, I should really try x."
This is somewhere between very goal-oriented extremely proactive sort of advice, and "just relax." It's just: adjust your behavior slightly, do something a bit out of the ordinary whenever it occurs to you, without thinking about ends too hard.
seeking out a woman with low self-esteem and joining with her in critiquing others, using your devastating wit?
This is probably good advice. Though it makes me sad, somehow, because I harbor a fantasy where the charming commenters at unfogged who feel shy or have low self-esteem will all come to realize how very charming they are and no longer have to suffer the painful self-consciousness thing.
if you're using "food service industry" to imply "waitress that gets hit on all the time"
This is part of my thinking, but I also fail miserably at contextualizing "signals". Many servers are trained to be smiley, and some no doubt employ flirtation and subtle physical contact (to great effect) for better tips.
LB's and Tim's advice seems right, be considerate, and open to rejection. It is perhaps the idea that getting turned down means the request itself was inappropriate that is my problem.
62: That sounds right but I wonder if it's an observation that can only be made in hindsight.
I think, somewhat paradoxically, that "be yourself" is the advice that should be followed most self-consciously. At first glance, "be yourself" is not advice that's compatible with "go against your regular inclinations." And certainly if you go against _the wrong_ regular inclinations then you're just going to make everything worse. (Ben was basically suggesting that he go against some of his regular inclinations in #50, while also making it clear that those inclinations are because of who he is.)
Figure out which of your regular inclinations are preventing you from being yourself, and go against those. Perhaps an inclination towards caution or an inclination towards self-criticism are causing you to undermine yourself.
I think I intend it more as an observation than advice: it always seems that a woman who tells me she's about to get married prefaces it by saying, "I always used to date x-type guy, and J. wasn't really like that, but for once I thought, why not give him a try?" Or similar.
It is perhaps the idea that getting turned down means the request itself was inappropriate that is my problem.
I'm so not the person to trust on these matters, but you may be too worried about being a good guy. It's not as if there's one objective standard out there; everyone has their own set of rules. It's hard to imagine how asking someone out at a restaurant could be considered inappropriate. I suppose it's possible she would be offended somehow. But as long as you don't ask her out by pulling out your penis and asking, "How'd you like some of this," she'll get over it.
Your bias is towards being an overly nice guy. Per ac, make small changes in the other direction.
65: I should also mention the advantage of hitting on women at work is that they've got a very convenient way out if your attention is unwelcome. On the other hand, if she's taking 10 minutes away from work to have a conversation with you, then she's probably not just expressing professional courtesy.
On the other hand, if she's taking 10 minutes away from work to have a conversation with you, then she's probably not just expressing professional courtesy.
being fun and flirtation and successful in dating is like riding a bike, in that it seems so [i]natural[/i] once you've figured it out, but there're dozens of ways to fuck it up, so its quite hard to get it right at first.
This is not true; one's "regular inclinations" may be toward editing and self-censorship.
I knew a guy who really did decide to do what #50 suggested (and a few others who've intended to). He decided that his 'nice guy' personality was standing in the way of romantic success so he made conscious efforts to go against type: he's inclined to be shy about asking a waitress out for, I think, the same reason that sam k is.
But instead of suppressing his tendency to convince himself that asking women out is a hostile act, he reinforced it suppressed his caring about acting inappropriately. So now he's learned to be boorish and disrespectful towards women. Naturally it's set him back when it comes to finding a mutually loving relationship.
Going against type can make things worse. What's more important is learning not to undermine yourself.
It's hard to imagine how asking someone out at a restaurant could be considered inappropriate.
You could ask out someone who's there on a formal date.
But I don't understand why sam k needs more advice, if he's got her phone number on a receipt. Also, I'm curious to see how the upcoming generation will adapt the tribe model that LB describes, given that they're having rainbow parties when they're just hanging out.
I guess getting a phone number on one's receipt could be considered a fairly strong signal...
Whoa, I missed that part! Yeah, from that I would definitely say you should work on inhibiting your self-doubt, sam... are you not aware that you've already been passive-aggressively asked out?
But I don't understand why sam k needs more advice, if he's got her phone number on a receipt.
I don't have a particular girl in mind here. I brought up the receipt to imply that even when the signals are no longer signals, but in fact material advances, sometimes I still blow it.
80: For sam k, the behavior we're recommending is "boorish and disrespectful"; his specific problem is that he's working off a different definition of "boorish and disrespectful" than many others. (I realize this isn't true of sam k; just pointing at the problem.)
I wasn't thinking of sam k, I was thinking of general answers to the question of "how can I change myself in such a way as to make dating not so bad for me?" "Be yourself" is not a helpful way of changing yourself.
So we've established that being yourself is not a good way to change yourself, and changing yourself into a worse person isn't good either. What's left?
On the other hand, if you think of "yourself" not as "you, as you currently are" but as some kind of essential "yourself," composed of that which you and others find best about you, and towards which you hope your life will lead you, then "be yourself" does make some sense since "to be yourself" is to fulfill that potential.
69 is pretty much true. Asking someone out is not, in and of itself, inappropriate in any way. It's a compliment. Just because the answer to that (or any other question) is "no," doesn't mean the question is inappropriate; that's why one asks questions.
This, if I may be a bitch for a moment, is the problem with the shy/low-self-esteem crowd. People, you're so worried about being turned down that you're not doing a very good job of empathizing with the people you're interested in. Would you be flattered if someone asked you out, even if you weren't interested in them? Yes, of course. Would you be startled if someone who, up until then, had been so reserved that it didn't occur to you they were interested in you, asked you out? Would being startled really be the same as flinching? Would you be inclined to say "yes" to someone you knew reasonably well? Wouldn't you be inclined to say "no" to someone you'd known long enough to decide that they obviously weren't interested and were never going to make a move, so you'd firmly put them in the "friend" category?
It's going to be awkward if you're the awkward, shy type. That's just a given. But that doesn't mean it's not flattering, or that she won't be interested; awkward sincerity can be awfully charming. But preemptively deciding that the woman you want to ask out is going to be offended at being asked sort of implies that she's kind of a bitch, doesn't it? Which presumably she isn't, or you wouldn't want to ask her out.
Right. And if you don't trust yourself not to chicken out or react well if the answer's no or whatever, then do it via email or something. But really: it's not a referendum on whether or not you're a worthwhile person. It's just a date. As in, let's go have dinner together. You eat. She eats.
Seriously, it's partly the feeling that someone is putting way too much into asking you out that tends to cause a "no" answer--as if what they're asking isn't, "would you have dinner with me?" but rather, "would you be my life partner and salvage my sense of being a worthwhile person?"
Pretend the person you're asking is a guy, or something, at least long enough to stammer out the question.
I once heard someone on BBC radio who knew Mick Jagger circa 1960, and he said, "Mick used to be really shy and have trouble with women. I, um, gather he's overcome this problem."
Right, it can be very uncomfortable to have to say "no," and once you've gotten the "no," subsequent interactions, if there are any, are pretty sure to be awkward.
87: I'm sympathetic to your problem. I think advice, in almost all areas, is often pointless, because it's usually so vacuous ("be yourself," "be confident," etc.) What you really need is a guy like Will telling you, "Right. Buy those shoes, and get a better haircut. See if you can join a single parents group."
Well, we're not going to lie, and there's no use pretending that the stress of asking isn't real, or somehow due to a confusion. That said, I only know 92 is true because I asked out a woman who worked at my Whole Foods, she said "no," and going to Whole Foods kinda sucked after that, but not enough to keep me from doing my shopping or anything.
Right, it can be very uncomfortable to have to say "no," and once you've gotten the "no," subsequent interactions, if there are any, are pretty sure to be awkward.
So stop interacting with her--she's already said she's not going to sleep with you. You're not trying to find someone who is moved by the authentic you; you are trying to find someone who will sleep with you. If there's more afterwards, great.
They key is to start enjoying awkward situations. I'm not kidding about this. Awkward situations are funny, so if you inadvertantly create one: whoops, wasn't that funny, and you move on. There is a good deal of insecurity and foolishness in all of us, and it's kind of humorous.
I suspect that we're all just giving advice for fun, without any real call for it. In which case, whoops, how very foolish of us.
96 - There may be some awkwardness for a while but it doesn't doom every future interaction between you and that person to awkwardness. I can think of at least one example of a time I've been shot down by a guy and gone on to resume a non-awkward friendship. Addressing the awkwardness head-on and talking about it can help.
I suspect that we're all just giving advice for fun, without any real call for it.
Actually I think the thing about advice is that when it works it's roundabout, and accidental. You can hear 12,000 things, and ignore 11,999 of them. And it's the thing you overheard while passing by your mom's sister's best friend that you'll take to heart. So giving advice, yeah, kind of pointless if you're actually hoping to have immediate impact. But in some collective cosmic sense, possibly obliquely helpful.
Reaching back, back into my more fraught past, my thought process vis a vis dating and asking out was this:
"I am the most loathesome person in any given room at any given time. I look funny and act weird and probably have offputting characteristics that I haven't even discovered yet. Other people consider me--when they consider me at all--so awful that they actively dread any contact with me. The only way I can salvage any shred of dignity from this situation is by being in the know about it, that is by being aware that I am horrible and therefore being courteous enough not to force any kind of company on anyone." (Although I am not actually horrible, as far as I can tell. And I don't think I was really horrible back then, either.)
A good fix for this is to ask out the shrinky, flinchy and low-self-esteemed (but only the ones you actually like, you know) because it's easier to believe that they won't run screaming.
A bad fix for this is to ask out only people to whom you feel superior so that you can be sure they won't run screaming. Or at least so that you can look down on them if they do. (And people..not, this time, me...do actually do this)
13: But pressure for some specific sex act is fine?
I have a good (because about me messing up what could have been a good thing) and potentially ongoing story along the lines of the phone number on the receipt situation, but I'd have to adopt another alias to tell it.
When a particularly unappealing guy shows interest in me, I'm not flattered. It makes me think I'm similarly unappealing, or why else would he feel emboldened to ask me out?
And I don't feel flattered when it's clear that the guy hitting on me hits on lots and lots of people.
There are many reasons not to be flattered by such attention.
"I am the most loathesome person in any given room at any given time. I look funny and act weird and probably have offputting characteristics that I haven't even discovered yet. Other people consider me--when they consider me at all--so awful that they actively dread any contact with me. The only way I can salvage any shred of dignity from this situation is by being in the know about it, that is by being aware that I am horrible and therefore being courteous enough not to force any kind of company on anyone."
Yow. This wins the "Most Depressing Statement I've Ever Identified Totally With" award.
Oh, 105, you have made all my worst fears a reality. Now I have grounds to believe that people really did dread contact with me all along...it's a good thing I've found a social circle with lower expectations.
100: in my less reputable days, when my friends and I went out to score chicks--and almost always failed--we gathered Tales of Woe. A Tale of Woe was much more entertaining than any other sort of story.
LizardBreath, mon semblable, ma soeur! Yes, it does come across as stuck up, as one discovers later, and then crying from the heart "But I just want you to like me!" doesn't help.
So, now that I've recovered a little from contemplating 105, I have a question: What makes someone so unappealing that being asked out by them is embarassing/unpleasant?
(Besides, that is, being asked out by someone who asks out anything in, as it were, a dress and uncomfortable shoes.)
The way I learned to ask people out was to convince myself that the point of asking wasn't to get a date, it was to get better at asking out interesting women. That way it is a success, no matter what happened. After a few months of asking any woman who I talked to for more than half an hour, I was over the difficulty.
Posted by
Unfoggetarian: "Pause endlessly, then go in." (9) |
Link to this comment |
08-25-06 1:45 PM
116
110: Did you not see that I already made the "your comment is funny and therefore sexy" joke? Nobody likes a cockblocker, ogged.
I am introverted but I am also pretty picky. I don't think that is too uncommon. I get the sense that dating the wrong person is more of a problem for an introvert than an extrovert.
Re. awkwardness, Becks said what I was trying to get at. Yes, you'll feel a little embarrassed and awkward. It won't kill you. I mean, look. You can sit around concocting reasons why you're a loathsome person and be miserable. Or you can stick your neck out and try and be miserable. If you're going to be miserable either way, you might as well do the thing that runs the risk of maybe making you slightly less miserable or, god forbid, even pleased.
I'm totally pulling the tough love thing here. One of the wisest things my mom ever said to me was "everyone else is way too worried about what you think about them to really bother thinking much about you." It's generally true. If they think about you much, they either already like you (in which case, you're in) or they loathe you (which is probably obvious). Everyone in between is a tossup. They might say yes, in which case you have at least a chance. Or they might say no, in which case you feel embarrassed, but it's a momentary interaction, and as long as you don't hang around and moon forever, or keep asking, it's no big deal. Next time you see them, smile, and don't pigeonhole them for conversation, and they'll be grateful to you for knowing how to assuage their *own* fears of awkwardness.
110: Well, I don't put my ugly pictures up on the Internet. But thanks for the compliment.
112: It's more of a cumulative thing. If, in a given period of time, the *only* people who ever approach me are significantly older; obviously crazy; totally undiscriminating; smelly, whatever...I'm inclined to start wondering if I've been rating myself too highly.
Taken case by case, it's not really a problem. But when this is the trend, one is not flattered.
112.--When I've felt bad about someone's asking me out, it's often some version of feeling guilty. It might have been something else when I was, like, twenty: some combination of sexual panic, peer pressure, and I don't know what.
118: That was clearly for you. "And I don't feel flattered when it's clear that the guy hitting on me hits on lots and lots of people," was for me. It's not enough to read, ogged, you have to understand.
I suspect that we're all just giving advice for fun, without any real call for it.
That's certainly true for me! And having said this, I want to defend 'be yourself' as good advice to keep in mind when trying to change aspects of your behavior. There are some ways in which people change for the better and some ways in which they would be ill-advised to try and I think 'be yourself' separates these categories.
Shyness is a good example. I don't think becoming extroverted is a good goal for a shy person. Controlling one's shyness rather than letting it be in control is a good goal.
What's unappealing about being asked out? Being put on the spot by someone who, out of the blue, confesses to a long-standing crush that you had no clue of. It's a little too much for a pre-first date confession.
Or the contrary, being asked out by someone who's obviously just trying to be a player.
Or--and this is the tough one for the shy--being asked out in a way that sounds like it's actually a little hostile? You know, like the whole, "I'm sure you probably have better things to do and all that, but if you don't, I was thinking maybe you'd go to a movie with me, but it's cool if you don't want to, I was just wondering." Now that I'm older, I can interpret that kind of diffidence as shyness, but when I was in my 20s, it always seemed like it was something the guy was doing on a dare, or something. Like he was trying to talk you out of saying yes, even if you'd been inclined to.
Every time you fail in the game of love, a miniature john cusack alights in your soul. Eventually, you've got so many john cusacks in your soul, that you are just awesome, and can go eat ice cream.
But if you haven't got enough john cusacks, you aren't awesome enough to eat ice cream, so go out there and say something clever already.
106 and 107 are exactly right. B is also exactly right, and very wise, but the trick maybe is not so much listening to B--although that's certainly good--as finding yourself alone with a B-like person who is better at cutting through the bullshit than you are.
And re the exchange student bit upthread: I once had a real-life Swedish exchange student follow me into the bathroom, and later flop in my lap by the fire, and did basically nothing. Oh, the missed opportunities.
Oh! I actually have some pragmatic advice for asking people out! This may not work for you, and it doesn't always for me, but it has worked for me sometimes.
This is a psychological fake-out I use on myself early in the dating process, when I'm mortally afraid of rejection. I find some afternoon or evening activity I myself want to do, something that my better, more active self would just do spontaneously, like explore a new neighborhood or rent a kayak or whatever. Propose the specific activity to the person I'm trying to get closer to. Okay, but here's the kicker: if the other person says no, I try to make myself go do that thing anyway.
134: What's nice about this is that it also makes it easier for a tending-toward-shy person to show authentic enthusiasm. "Hey, there is this great exhibit that I'm going to go to on Sunday -- would you like to come along?"
Very interesting post and comments. As a loner with a few very good friends I have always sucked at the whole networking thing of getting a huge number of aquintances to be exploited. And thus I verily remain a virgin to this day. I don't really see an answer to my problems though, alternate ways dating seem to be even worse for a shy guy. I do like electronic music so I guess 43 is kind of promising.
Oh and ben, if you don't have any good plans yet for your trip to Finland, mail me to meet a really uncool and socially inept engineering student. Great fun awaits you!
Now I think I'll just go "clubbing" to a "rave" since I'm a little drunk and it's 29 degrees in my apartment and 18 outside . What the fuck is up with that?
Though it seems to me that 134 requires a proviso, make it something the other person might plausibly like. I usually figure it would not be good to ask someone along to one of my free-jazz shows if I don't have any reason to think they might like it. (Further research shows that this is not true.) Though I did know a very cute woman who was always up for experimental film; though I didn't know that until we'd been on another date and then become just friends.
I'd be interested in a list of good NYC first-dates-that-aren't-dinners. About my only thought would be wandering aimlessly until we find something we want to do. Not because there aren't events around New York that I want to go to, but because most of them aren't good for talking, and I don't see how your first date is supposed to work unless you're talking for a while.
132: Yes. The prospect of being completely without friends or anywhere to turn, with PK in tow, and no place safe, is worse than the prospect of dying.
141: Dinner can be an okay first date if you're doing the cooking, especially for men. I recall some sage saying recently that men who cook are men who get laid.
The thing about the non-talking first-date event is that you can go somewhere afterwards--coffee, a drink, dessert--and *talk about the event*. Which is a great help.
I would amend 138. Don't say "would you like to come along," which is ambiguous. Say "would you come with me?" That's an invitation, rather than a maybe-date, maybe-just-this-person-is-bored-and-wants-company thing.
146 - Drinks on the roof of the Met during the summer is nice. Shows at the Upright Citizens Brigade are usually short, funny, cheap, and give you something to talk about. Also, I don't know about a first date, but I've always wanted to find someone who thought a great date idea was a picnic in Green-Wood Cemetery (the most beautiful place in NYC, IMO). Alas, most people I suggest that to think I'm insane.
146.--Well, apparently there's a corpse-flower blossoming for the first time in like 50 years at the Brooklyn Botanical Garden. That would make a good quest.
146: in New York? It's an embarassment of riches. Small galleries, coffee shops, washington square park, an old bookstore, offering to squeegee the windows of unspecting drivers caught in traffic. There's a reason why like 90% of romantic comedies are set in New York.
I agree with 149. Event plus coffee/drinks before and after can be nice.
I disagree with 148 for a first date. A fairly popular chick lit author agrees with me that cooking dinner on a date = expected sex. (Becks has also mentioned this somewhere.) Too much pressure.
I can't read all of these comments, but my advice to teofilo is this: Ask out someone you genuinely like. That sounds more obvious than it is -- I've known guys who ask women out almost indiscriminately, or who ask out girls just because they think they'll have a chance. It's obvious to a girl when she's been asked out for one of these reasons, and it's not flattering. But ask out a woman because you truly like her (because she's funny, or super-smart, or weird, or has pretty smiley eyes), and at the very least, she'll be flattered and happy that she was noticed for her specialness. And she's more likely to like you back for it.
Felix beat me to it, but my understanding is that it bloomed at about 2:00 AM and the smell dissipated very soon thereafter. I guess the New York Botanical Gardens (the Bronx one's) wouldn't be too bad if you wanted to spend a lot of time talking on the train/staring awkwardly at each other.
152: I would do/have done all of those things as subsequent dates.
Another possibility are all of those bizillion outdoors events. Last night the Met did "La Traviata" in Central Park. Last summer, my honey and I saw the Merce Cunningham Co. in Battery Park. There's a series called "The River to River Festival" you might check out. You might find an events calendar on the NY Parks department website. Also, Harlem Week seems to last all of August, but events can be hard to hear about unless you see the flyers up here.
If you're into this sort of thing, I recently heard about people bouldering in Central Park. I think the community website is nyclimbs.com.
I agree with Matt in 159. And, actually, I pretty much equate inviting somebody home with invitating them to maybe, probably, have sex. (Insert disclaimers.)
Ok, I actually do many of these things, and just tend not to think of them on the rare occasions when a young woman foolishly decides to go out with me for the first time.
Then we could have said, "we'll always have gay hell." But now all that can be said is we might have gone to gay hell, if given the chance. More's the pity.
172: I am not so confident as to ask someone something that amounts to "Let's have sex" before we've actually been on a date. Those who are probably don't need these suggestions.
Yeah, along with "Normal Looking Names", "Unpronounceable Jumbles of Letters" are some of my less favorite pseuds. I find them very hard to attach personalities to, and hard to distinguish from similar jumbles. (But I'm just cranky like that. No one should feel bad because I disapprove of your name.)
Yes, I should have put more thought into my nondescript and now potentially confusing moniker. Incidentally, teofilo, you may note that I somehow went from being the painfully shy sort of person that B crushes under her heel into someone who just up and invited women over for dinner, meaning sex. So a bright future awaits. (I later got married, but you might not want to take it that far for a bit.)
I go out to drive somewhere, get stuck in a bit of traffic, and now there are 100s of comments here and elsewhere. Most of 93 seems right. I haven't read past that yet.
Well, see, I have this thing about balloons. Not really a phobia, more like a mild revulsion. But what the hell, I'll take Alligator Shortpants if jmh, or jms, rejects it.
I think jmcq and jms (and eb and all those other jumble people) should adopt pseudonyms that use the letters as an acronym. That way there's some continuity, but their pseuds become more memorable.
For example:
Just Make Coffee Quickly
Junior Mint Snorter
Every Body's
Is it really the case that no one sees how "yes" can be a problem for certain levels of shy? You guys all need to get out less and broaden your horizons.
I once found a dog and took it back to the address on its tag, and the young guy who opened the door looked as though he'd just had about a dozen huge bong hits. All he said was "dude," like seven or eight times, but I knew from his inflection that he was really saying, "Oh, my dog -- I didn't even realize he'd gotten out. Thanks!"
There is a fine scene in the first series of The Wire, in which Bunk and McNulty analyze a crime scene, using only variations of the well-known Anglo-Saxon fricative.
eb should stay eb; I finally got the eb/ac thing sorted out in my head and can't handle a shift now.
212 is totally hilarious. I'd so kick PK's ass if he called me "brah," too, just on general principles. Though he does call me "Mr. Mama" from time to time.
214: Jupiter Mars Ceres Quaoar is a bit of a mouthful, and the first two parts suggest a more testosterone-heavy character than suits me. So I'm just going to start commenting under my own name, starting now.
She was seeing someone at the time, and other friends of ours were present, one of whom brought up the idea of going on a date at Target. I had, in fact, earlier in our friendship asked her if she wanted to get dinner (which she did) or wanted to see a movie (which she did) but each time she seemed to interpret that as asking whether she wanted to go to dinner or a movie with other friends of ours, because each time her answer was, "yes, and I'll see so and so would also like to come along."
speaking of brazen pick up attempts, a guy just saw me reading my weight lifting book on the train, and passed me his name, number, and email on a paper, with the explanation that he was a personal trainer. I told him I had no money more than once, and he kept telling me not to worry about it, so I assume he was trying to pick me up. He told me he would give me a nutritional consultation and help me with my fitness goals. What I really want to do is have someone in the gym with me to correct my form, but I don't know if Crunch will let him in. Maybe he can get a guest pass.
Anyway, I was looking him up and down and thinking I would sleep with him, and further thinking I would especially sleep with him if I got personal training out of it, although his pickup attempt kind of went awry when he showed me pictures of him in a bodybuilding competition on his ipod. He looked good in clothes, but kind of gruesome oiled up in a speedo. However, I want to email him. Maybe he can train me somewhere other than Crunch.
lesson: becoming a personal trainer is a good way to get women.
144: Sure though I think I'd prefer to lose my virginity with an actual wo/man. In other news Rättö & Lehtisalo at Tavastia review: trippy stuff but I prefer either Circle or Kuusumun Profeetta. Just barely worth the admission fee (6 euros and a half an hour wait in the queue). My apartment has cooled to 27 degrees (Celcius you Great Satan American oppressors) so it's possible to sleep at last.
I'm sorry about my jumble-of-letters name here, too. My first name is way too common here at the 'Shaft, and I don't have an obvious nickname. Maybe I'll start commenting as, like, Captain Awesome or something.
Another Matt? It's like some sort of freakish infestation.
No, seriously, don't let it bother you. The only reason I complain is that it makes it harder for me to keep people straight, and I'm afraid of snubbing someone I've been 'talking' to for months. Call yourself whatever you want.
233: That's like 80 in real degrees, you freedom-hating, umlaut-loving socialist. The Great Satan considers that perfectly comfortable for such wholesome pursuits as baseball, tax cuts and the suppression of atheism. Fords not fjords, bee-yotch.
I am very old, and hence from the era when people dated. I agree with you that there was something about dating that, while harder at one level (I hated asking someone out for the first time) was much easier and clearer afterwards.
Posted by Idealist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:28 AM
Leon knows the answer!
Posted by baa | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:30 AM
I think the informal system has an advantage in that it doesn't force you to be in the college dating equivalent of "spouse hunting mode" all the time. It's easier to avoid rigid and traditional expectiations of a relationship if you eschew the formal procedure for courting someone, and lets you just enjoy the relationship for what it is rather than worrying about it's "progression" or whatever.
However, for people who can't navigate the informal system so easily (such as myself most of the time), it does have it's drawbacks. Sometimes a predefined procedure can make things easier.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:34 AM
I don't know, I'm an introvert, completely not "gregarious and very, very, socially skilled", and it worked for me. In fact, it works better for loners, because loners are even less likely to express an interest in someone without having a reasonable relationship with them first. I guess it has a significant failure rate as well, though.
Posted by SP | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:34 AM
4: The problem with it for introverts is that it (statistically) depends on having an awfully big group of buddies. (Not always, given that it worked for you, of course.) In any bunch of friends a number are coupled up, some more are not attractive to you -- you need a social life that incorporates a lot of people to have much of a hope of hooking up this way. Which is great if you do, but tough if you don't.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:37 AM
I did a fair amount of the "hang out and just let it happen" in college, but if some nice guy I didn't really know asked me to do some fun activity--explore a park, visit a museum, go to a lecture, whatever--I almost always agreed. In at least a few cases, I ended up sleeping with or seriously dating some of them. However, these guys didn't manoeuvre through my pack of friends; they found me in class, at rehearsals, or in cafes, where I was probably easier to approach.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:38 AM
I think 6 illustrates one of the ways that dating was easier. The guys Jackmormon refers to did not have to make their way into her circle of friends before they could express an interest in her. If you are very shy like me, trying to break into a circle of friends is even harder than asking a woman on a date.
Posted by Idealist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:42 AM
This is certainly the week of "Unfogged Posts About Things On Which I, A Lurker, Am Informed Enough To Have An Opinion And Am Thus Allured Into Posting", what with the shoes and the career women and all.
As someone whose immediate, Marlene Dietrich-in-Blue-Angel-style sex-appeal is near zero, I'm actually rather partial to the large groups/subsequent pairing. I don't think I'd ever get any dates at all if I depended on someone being smitten from across the room and calling me up for an old-fashioned date, whereas I've had sufficient if not excessive success by sparkling charmingly at people in group settings until they forget my lack of glamour.
Although at least in my social circle, there's a 2.5, and this may be key: after affinity has been noticed, one casually invites Object on the sort of outing that one might schedule with a regular friend. I mean, I go to coffee and movies and record-shopping with friends, as well as with Objects. Smooching sometimes ensues, usually after you've stayed up late enough to make work a living hell the next day.
After some years of this, I realized that I actually liked the fuss and the anxiety of this process, sometimes more than I liked the relationships that ensued.
If there were formal dates, how would they work? How would you know that you liked someone enough to ask them out? Just because they were all, you know, hott? I'm pretty seriously partnered at the moment, so I can kick away the ladder I climbed and accept a return to formal dates even on that basis, I guess.
Posted by Frowner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:46 AM
Oh, they say something clever in class; you run into them at a party and have an entertaining conversation; you can run into someone enough to have an opinion of them without being in their social circle enough to do the "Whoops -- how'd we end up making out? Cool." routine.
And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the organic method of dating, not at all. Just that it heavily favors a particular personality, and so alternatives for the rest of us would be good.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:49 AM
LB's crazy; it was much, much worse the other way. Please do not ruin Generation Awesome, LB.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:52 AM
How old are you? I'm 35, and it's been this way since I was a pup.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:54 AM
This series of threads and posts reminds me of Freaks and Geeks, which was teh awesome and never should have been cancelled after only one season.
Posted by SP | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:55 AM
I'm saying that both are okay, Timbot. Particularly if "date" means activity that is fun in itself, gets you out of the damn house, and no pressure for some specific sex act to follow.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:56 AM
In high school I also tried the stalker method, join the clubs she's in and go cheer her on at sporting events. This did not work but actually did get me into her circle of friends because her friends were at these events as well, so I got partway there- we ended up friends but nothing more.
Posted by SP | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:57 AM
11: I'm in your ballpark. (IYKWIM. AITTYD.) It was formal-y in high school, organic in college. The latter is much better.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 8:59 AM
14.--If there was only one girl you were focussing on, then, no, I'm not surprised it didn't work out.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:00 AM
11 --- I'm 36 and it sort of seemed to me in high school and college like it should be that way you're describing; but every time I ever attempted to make a pass at a female friend, it was either not noticed or else came off as way creepy/friendship-ending.
Posted by Clownæsthesiologist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:00 AM
Well, high school sucks, SCMTim. Maybe I was better off not being allowed to date back then.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:02 AM
I have never gotten once laid through the organic method, unless you count the guy I had sex with in college, but even that organic effect had been preceded by some formality on his part months prior. If I count all times my options are open, I probably bat .900 or so through more formal approaches. I am shy, and I imagine more attractive when I can pitch my manner to an indivdual man, then move into group interactions that are sometimes uneasy for me.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:06 AM
It's difficult to have a large, casual social circle after college, that's true. I don't feel confident enough in some kind of empirical modernist history-writing to really assert this, but I suspect that the decrease in church/union/immigrant association type of culture is a big factor. I suspect this primarily because almost all of my relationships (and all the good ones) have evolved out of shared projects (er, activism...I am one of THOSE people). I would be totally lost even in Provincial Metropolis without this kind of large group--people whose ideas I share to some degree, people I spend time around week after week. It's also key that you don't actually know everyone in this large group super-well, and that you don't neccesssarily like some of them. That adds frisson, as it were. The nice thing about activism, too, is that the barrier to entry is pretty low--you just show up. And even in Provincial Metropolis, there's enough diversity among (left-wing) activists that you don't need to hang around with the creepy anarcho-primitivists or the Stalinists or even the miscellaneously poorly informed if you don't want to.
But then this method clearly doesn't work for everyone. (And the real catch is this--you get many more dates if you believe in the activism than if you're just trolling for relationships . Ergo, there's some limitation on effectiveness.)
Posted by Frowner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:06 AM
I beat Matt Weiner in a thumb war.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:07 AM
21- He was just hitting on you.
Posted by SP | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:12 AM
Hey didt'n Weiner and Tia leave the most recent meetup in each other's company?...
Posted by Clownæsthesiologist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:15 AM
That is to say: 21 may be a euphemism.
Posted by Clownæsthesiologist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:16 AM
I am disqualified from commenting here because of my basic philosophy of relationships, but I think that the contemporary system would have worked better for me than the system in place in my youth. It's a lot easier to hang out with a group than to ask for a date.
"The system in place in my youth": the two systems, actually. High school was the "Love Me Tender" Elvis System, and college was the "Why don't we do it in the road" Jim Morrison System.
Yes, I'm aware that that's a Beatles song. WIth the Beatles it was satire, but Morrison really believed that.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:18 AM
join the clubs she's in and go cheer her on at sporting events
This strikes me as a great path to "I think of you like a brother."
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:20 AM
Actually, something I posted on my site a week or two ago is actually highly relevant to the "sleepover" question: sleepovers in Polynesia, Japan, and XIVc Italy.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:23 AM
you can still, definitely, ask people you've just met for their numbers, or e-mail addresses, and then ask them on dates. It happens.
Doing that takes some sort of extrovertedness, but then, you aren't required to cull romantic options from a pack of friends.
And it's only sleazy when it happens at bars. Or when you're sleazy about it.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:24 AM
23 - Maybe Tia's April Fool's post wasn't all a joke. Maybe it just that Ogged was really Weiner...
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:32 AM
Dude, moe totolo hasn't got anything to do with this sort of sleepovers. It's basically rape, with variations of "There's no socially acceptable way for the girl to consent, so she connives at it but can maintain deniability if caught" and "Well, once they've had sex, might as well get married. Rape schmape." Perhaps an interesting subject of discussion, but not strongly related.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:32 AM
I've a related question for the Mineshaft. Is it okay to ask a girl out while she's on the job (I'm thinking specifically of the food service industry here)?
My sense is that it's not, but my female friends say it is.
Posted by sam k | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:33 AM
You have to be reasonably deft about it to not be putting her in a position where she's professionally obliged to be nice to you. Say, after you've already paid and tipped; not obviously in earshot of management. Nothing fundamentally wrong with it, you just have to watch that you aren't making it difficult for her to say no thanks if she wants to.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:36 AM
I'd say it's only ok if she has signalled fairly strongly that she's interested, and even then, under LB's conditions. And if you've misread the signals, it is your bad.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:42 AM
I guess getting a phone number on one's receipt could be considered a fairly strong signal...
Posted by sam k | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:44 AM
um, yes. call it.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:44 AM
Yep. That'll work.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:45 AM
I've heard both versions of moetotolo. A guy from Micronesia told me that it often was by agreement with the girl and that sometimes the family approved (by cooking breakfast for the guy), if only ex post facto. Obviously this is one of the most controversial questions in anthropology.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:45 AM
31: Go with your female friends' advice. They're there. Just be polite about it; waitresses, bartenders, etc., get hit on all of the time, and most have a polite way of deflecting it. If you get the polite way, understand that it's not an indication that you need to renew your efforts with greater subtlety, but a "No."
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:46 AM
Tim is wise.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:49 AM
The method LB describes always worked for me, have never done anything else. (No, I lie, I went on two dates with one boy when I was about 17 - we met through a mutual friend, but I didn't really like him, just went for the novelty value.) And I don't think I'm *that* gregarious or highly socially-skilled. I did get asked for my phone number once, by a bloke I'd just met, but he never phoned.
The trouble is with the more formal method is that it doesn't necessarily indicate romantic intent if you ask someone that you're already friends with to a film or exhibition. I think I may have unwittingly been the innocent friend who didn't notice any undercurrents on a couple of occasions.
Posted by asilon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 9:51 AM
I'd never really done anything like the 'formal' dating thing really until I met my wife.
Everything prior was, as I've discussed (at tedious and probably annoying length in other threads) just meeting people through friends or hooking up in a half-drunken way at parties, in bars or in clubs.
When I met my wife, I had to ask for her phone number as I knew there was no other way I'd see her again otherwise. And then we had to go on semi-formal dates as she was living near London and I was in Oxford. I found that all a bit stressful -- we got on well, obviously -- but travelling to another city for a 'date' just put way more pressure on the situation than I'm used to.
Posted by nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:17 AM
Is it okay to ask a girl out while she's on the job
Oh the glories of the differences in the language!
BTW, "I think of you as a brother" is the most evil and undermining thing it's possible to say. If you can't keep a straight face long enough to say "thanks, but no", then "Fuck off and die" is acceptable. But not the other thing.
Posted by OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:18 AM
One of the many fabulous things I discovered upon moving to the UK is that here, an amazingly large percentage of the population takes ecstacy on a semi-regular basis, at least into their mid-20s and for a lot of folks well into their 30s. (Seriously - there are loads of pretty straight Brits who wouldn't be drug takers in teh US, but take ecstasy here, 'cause it's such a part of the culture.)
If you're looking for a way to by-pass the social difficulties that LB mentions, getting everyone high on ecstacy once a month or so is a pretty solid solution. At that stage, 'Relax. Just be friendly. It happens naturally. Don't push it' is pretty much the reality.
Wouldn't work for true loners, of course, but for someone with a friend or two, who occasionally goes to clubs...
(However, I am a firm believer that if a you do allow your child to have a boyfriend/girlfriend sleep over, giving them ecstasy is taking things a step too far.)
Posted by reuben | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:44 AM
However, these guys didn't manoeuvre through my pack of friends; they found me in class, at rehearsals, or in cafes, where I was probably easier to approach.
More approachable in a cafe? Let's face it: there is no good way for the shy/socially awkward/etc to make friends or "influence" people. This is why I think teo should relax: not because he'll end up getting any that way, but because why get one's undies in a twist over what's a bad situation to anyway? But I may be bitter because like LB, I am horrifically and painfully bad at this and related shit, but unlike her, I am not now happily paired off, much less to anyone with so manly a name as "Buck".
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:44 AM
43 -- the only time I took ecstasy in my life was also the occasion of my losing my cherished virginity.
Posted by Clownæsthesiologist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:50 AM
(And in a way that was not ultimately particularly fun, I hasten to add -- I'm not recommending this to Teo or anything.)
Posted by Clownæsthesiologist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:52 AM
As far as I can tell, The Kid's mixed M/F, het/gay social group hangs out with each other in bunches and randomly in pairs, is somewhat fluid in its sexual orientation and does some "friends with benefits". Those who mate still hang out with the bunch, rather than going on conventional dates, as far as I can see. This may have more to do with their college-age status and the expense of dinner-and-a-movie in Los Angeles; it's cheaper to buy a pitcher of beer at a local hangout and play their iPods at each other.
Like Idealist, I am very old, but I was a geek grrl in HS and college, and not very socially adept. Looking back, I can see that I was getting hit on, but my complete inability to recognise that kind of strangled the opportunities to date. [Husband #1 hooked up with me only through his own persistence, which had more to do with his realising that I was exactly the woman to drive his parents into hysterics than anything else.]
Then I discovered other geeks, learnt how to socialise and lived happily ever after.
I met the Biophysicist online, and we can never have been said to have "dated" at all, unless naughty weekends can be counted as "dates". Living 2057 miles apart at the beginning may have had something to do with that.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:52 AM
B-wo, your whimsical contemtousness should do you quite well. I'm not kidding. If you were to say the things you write online to people in real life, I think you'd be quite popular. Except among sucky people, who would hate you, so avoid them.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:54 AM
whimsical contemptuousness would do you even better.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:55 AM
I find the transition from whimsical contempt to hot make-outs somewhat to extremely difficult to effect, even when the targets of the two are different persons.
Actually, maybe that's been my problem. I should find someone with low self-esteem and continuously mock and insult her, and then suddenly turn around and act very sweetly, disarming her. Sort of rock the abusive jerk thing.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 10:59 AM
I think you should just generally target everyone with your whimsy and contempt, and go from there.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:02 AM
In all of these discussions it seems the key thing, in transitioning from near-permanent drought to 'oh my god, not more sex', is being able to tell when someone else is interested in you.
And that's a really hard thing to teach/learn.
Posted by nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:06 AM
The sex life I had in my twenties was largely thanks to activism.
I'm a loner for the most part, so situations in my past where I've been in awkward-loner milieus were pretty good for me (for instance, when I was doing a Master's in philosophy in a city that had nothing else going on in it). The NYC "dating" scene is a horror. It's like going on fucking job interviews (literally and figuratively!). The fun of sex is, for me anyway, totally not worth the price of dating.
Approaching someone and going out on a pressure-laden date is so much more painful for me as an introvert than just getting drunk and hooking up with someone I've known for a while.
Posted by dagger aleph | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:10 AM
Ben (as a total stranger to you) I know you're only kidding about 50, but really, don't do this. Don't don't don't. Unless, that is, you want a really horribly entangling and painful involvement with the kind of woman who grew up liking/needing smart men to be really, really mean to her. (...er...not that this would be me in youth or anything) Women who like smart men to be smartishly mean at them are BAD bets. They're not even like the exciting-yet-troubled women who like men who are aggressive, macho jerks. (ie, the sex is not exceptionally hott as compensation for the horrible drama) (That is, I'm assuming that the vast majority of Unfogged posters are what I tend to think of as smart)
How about seeking out a woman with low self-esteem and joining with her in critiquing others, using your devastating wit? That worked for Significant Other, and while I may be no prize I am at least presentable.
Posted by Frowner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:11 AM
Overlooking in high school or college what in retrospect were obvious clues, come-ons, and opportunities is not to be taken as a sign of social ineptitude. The charming commenters at Unfogged are ruining the currency by each claiming such.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:11 AM
There is also the distinct possibility that some people here understating the depth of their shyness.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:31 AM
are
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:32 AM
(And in a way that was not ultimately particularly fun, I hasten to add -- I'm not recommending this to Teo or anything.)
I think Teo should try losing his virginity at least once.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:41 AM
With or without ecstasy?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:43 AM
I've a related question for the Mineshaft. Is it okay to ask a girl out while she's on the job (I'm thinking specifically of the food service industry here)?
Yes, I think so, even if you're using "food service industry" to imply "waitress that gets hit on all the time". Even people working in a highly social capacity where they get hit on by strangers all the time have standards; maybe you're different than the other guys that hit on her. (You probably are if you have to ask whether it's OK or not.)
Posted by neil | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:44 AM
58 -- I was not dissuading Teo from fucking but from following in my own particular, peculiar path.
Posted by Clownæsthesiologist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:46 AM
I'm not really in the advice-giving business anymore, but as I understand it the general way to break out of a pattern is to change your behavior slightly, go against your regular inclinations. This is usually the advice given to women who want to (for example) stop dating smart guys who put them down. Your natural way of being is so automatic and comfortable that you have to actively be thinking, "this is what I always do, I should really try x."
This is somewhere between very goal-oriented extremely proactive sort of advice, and "just relax." It's just: adjust your behavior slightly, do something a bit out of the ordinary whenever it occurs to you, without thinking about ends too hard.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:53 AM
That's pretty good advice, ac.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:58 AM
seeking out a woman with low self-esteem and joining with her in critiquing others, using your devastating wit?
This is probably good advice. Though it makes me sad, somehow, because I harbor a fantasy where the charming commenters at unfogged who feel shy or have low self-esteem will all come to realize how very charming they are and no longer have to suffer the painful self-consciousness thing.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 11:59 AM
if you're using "food service industry" to imply "waitress that gets hit on all the time"
This is part of my thinking, but I also fail miserably at contextualizing "signals". Many servers are trained to be smiley, and some no doubt employ flirtation and subtle physical contact (to great effect) for better tips.
LB's and Tim's advice seems right, be considerate, and open to rejection. It is perhaps the idea that getting turned down means the request itself was inappropriate that is my problem.
Posted by sam k | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:00 PM
62: That sounds right but I wonder if it's an observation that can only be made in hindsight.
I think, somewhat paradoxically, that "be yourself" is the advice that should be followed most self-consciously. At first glance, "be yourself" is not advice that's compatible with "go against your regular inclinations." And certainly if you go against _the wrong_ regular inclinations then you're just going to make everything worse. (Ben was basically suggesting that he go against some of his regular inclinations in #50, while also making it clear that those inclinations are because of who he is.)
Figure out which of your regular inclinations are preventing you from being yourself, and go against those. Perhaps an inclination towards caution or an inclination towards self-criticism are causing you to undermine yourself.
Posted by Anonymous | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:04 PM
"be yourself" is not advice that's compatible with "go against your regular inclinations."
This is not true; one's "regular inclinations" may be toward editing and self-censorship.
Posted by Clownæsthesiologist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:06 PM
I think I intend it more as an observation than advice: it always seems that a woman who tells me she's about to get married prefaces it by saying, "I always used to date x-type guy, and J. wasn't really like that, but for once I thought, why not give him a try?" Or similar.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:09 PM
It is perhaps the idea that getting turned down means the request itself was inappropriate that is my problem.
I'm so not the person to trust on these matters, but you may be too worried about being a good guy. It's not as if there's one objective standard out there; everyone has their own set of rules. It's hard to imagine how asking someone out at a restaurant could be considered inappropriate. I suppose it's possible she would be offended somehow. But as long as you don't ask her out by pulling out your penis and asking, "How'd you like some of this," she'll get over it.
Your bias is towards being an overly nice guy. Per ac, make small changes in the other direction.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:13 PM
66 was me.
65: I should also mention the advantage of hitting on women at work is that they've got a very convenient way out if your attention is unwelcome. On the other hand, if she's taking 10 minutes away from work to have a conversation with you, then she's probably not just expressing professional courtesy.
Posted by neil | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:14 PM
But as long as you don't ask her out by pulling out your penis and asking, "How'd you like some of this," she'll get over it.
No, sometimes this works.
Posted by sam k | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:16 PM
On the other hand, if she's taking 10 minutes away from work to have a conversation with you, then she's probably not just expressing professional courtesy.
This can't be right.
Posted by sam k | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:18 PM
being fun and flirtation and successful in dating is like riding a bike, in that it seems so [i]natural[/i] once you've figured it out, but there're dozens of ways to fuck it up, so its quite hard to get it right at first.
Posted by yoyo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:22 PM
This is not true; one's "regular inclinations" may be toward editing and self-censorship.
I knew a guy who really did decide to do what #50 suggested (and a few others who've intended to). He decided that his 'nice guy' personality was standing in the way of romantic success so he made conscious efforts to go against type: he's inclined to be shy about asking a waitress out for, I think, the same reason that sam k is.
But instead of suppressing his tendency to convince himself that asking women out is a hostile act, he reinforced it suppressed his caring about acting inappropriately. So now he's learned to be boorish and disrespectful towards women. Naturally it's set him back when it comes to finding a mutually loving relationship.
Going against type can make things worse. What's more important is learning not to undermine yourself.
Posted by neil | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:22 PM
72: That's the last advantage I left out. People at work are bored, so you don't have to compete with other stimuli so much.
Posted by neil | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:24 PM
It's hard to imagine how asking someone out at a restaurant could be considered inappropriate.
You could ask out someone who's there on a formal date.
But I don't understand why sam k needs more advice, if he's got her phone number on a receipt. Also, I'm curious to see how the upcoming generation will adapt the tribe model that LB describes, given that they're having rainbow parties when they're just hanging out.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:28 PM
I guess getting a phone number on one's receipt could be considered a fairly strong signal...
Whoa, I missed that part! Yeah, from that I would definitely say you should work on inhibiting your self-doubt, sam... are you not aware that you've already been passive-aggressively asked out?
Posted by neil | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:31 PM
But I don't understand why sam k needs more advice, if he's got her phone number on a receipt.
I don't have a particular girl in mind here. I brought up the receipt to imply that even when the signals are no longer signals, but in fact material advances, sometimes I still blow it.
Posted by sam k | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:36 PM
But as long as you don't ask her out by pulling out your penis and asking, "How'd you like some of this," she'll get over it.
Well sure, if you're only offering her some of it. You can't be a pinch-penny when you're trying to make a first impression, guys.
Posted by Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:42 PM
"Be yourself" is terrible advice. "Don't change yourself into someone boorish and disrespectful of women" is very good advice.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:43 PM
80: For sam k, the behavior we're recommending is "boorish and disrespectful"; his specific problem is that he's working off a different definition of "boorish and disrespectful" than many others. (I realize this isn't true of sam k; just pointing at the problem.)
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:51 PM
I wasn't thinking of sam k, I was thinking of general answers to the question of "how can I change myself in such a way as to make dating not so bad for me?" "Be yourself" is not a helpful way of changing yourself.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:54 PM
So we've established that being yourself is not a good way to change yourself, and changing yourself into a worse person isn't good either. What's left?
Posted by Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:57 PM
On the other hand, if you think of "yourself" not as "you, as you currently are" but as some kind of essential "yourself," composed of that which you and others find best about you, and towards which you hope your life will lead you, then "be yourself" does make some sense since "to be yourself" is to fulfill that potential.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:03 PM
69 is pretty much true. Asking someone out is not, in and of itself, inappropriate in any way. It's a compliment. Just because the answer to that (or any other question) is "no," doesn't mean the question is inappropriate; that's why one asks questions.
This, if I may be a bitch for a moment, is the problem with the shy/low-self-esteem crowd. People, you're so worried about being turned down that you're not doing a very good job of empathizing with the people you're interested in. Would you be flattered if someone asked you out, even if you weren't interested in them? Yes, of course. Would you be startled if someone who, up until then, had been so reserved that it didn't occur to you they were interested in you, asked you out? Would being startled really be the same as flinching? Would you be inclined to say "yes" to someone you knew reasonably well? Wouldn't you be inclined to say "no" to someone you'd known long enough to decide that they obviously weren't interested and were never going to make a move, so you'd firmly put them in the "friend" category?
It's going to be awkward if you're the awkward, shy type. That's just a given. But that doesn't mean it's not flattering, or that she won't be interested; awkward sincerity can be awfully charming. But preemptively deciding that the woman you want to ask out is going to be offended at being asked sort of implies that she's kind of a bitch, doesn't it? Which presumably she isn't, or you wouldn't want to ask her out.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:03 PM
Addendum to 85: if he or she says no, then you are not allowed to make them feel guilty or shitty about it.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:08 PM
People, you're so worried about being turned down
For certain levels of shy, this does not quite capture the problem.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:08 PM
87 gets it exactly right.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:11 PM
Right. And if you don't trust yourself not to chicken out or react well if the answer's no or whatever, then do it via email or something. But really: it's not a referendum on whether or not you're a worthwhile person. It's just a date. As in, let's go have dinner together. You eat. She eats.
Seriously, it's partly the feeling that someone is putting way too much into asking you out that tends to cause a "no" answer--as if what they're asking isn't, "would you have dinner with me?" but rather, "would you be my life partner and salvage my sense of being a worthwhile person?"
Pretend the person you're asking is a guy, or something, at least long enough to stammer out the question.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:13 PM
I once heard someone on BBC radio who knew Mick Jagger circa 1960, and he said, "Mick used to be really shy and have trouble with women. I, um, gather he's overcome this problem."
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:17 PM
Would you be flattered if someone asked you out, even if you weren't interested in them? Yes, of course.
Actually, speaking for myself, usually no.
Posted by dagger aleph | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:19 PM
Right, it can be very uncomfortable to have to say "no," and once you've gotten the "no," subsequent interactions, if there are any, are pretty sure to be awkward.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:20 PM
87: I'm sympathetic to your problem. I think advice, in almost all areas, is often pointless, because it's usually so vacuous ("be yourself," "be confident," etc.) What you really need is a guy like Will telling you, "Right. Buy those shoes, and get a better haircut. See if you can join a single parents group."
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:20 PM
91 & 92 - Not helpful.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:22 PM
This will all be cured when we live together in our east village co-op, in a giant free love unfogged open marriage.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:22 PM
91 & 92 - Not helpful.
Well, we're not going to lie, and there's no use pretending that the stress of asking isn't real, or somehow due to a confusion. That said, I only know 92 is true because I asked out a woman who worked at my Whole Foods, she said "no," and going to Whole Foods kinda sucked after that, but not enough to keep me from doing my shopping or anything.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:24 PM
Right, it can be very uncomfortable to have to say "no," and once you've gotten the "no," subsequent interactions, if there are any, are pretty sure to be awkward.
So stop interacting with her--she's already said she's not going to sleep with you. You're not trying to find someone who is moved by the authentic you; you are trying to find someone who will sleep with you. If there's more afterwards, great.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:25 PM
They key is to start enjoying awkward situations. I'm not kidding about this. Awkward situations are funny, so if you inadvertantly create one: whoops, wasn't that funny, and you move on. There is a good deal of insecurity and foolishness in all of us, and it's kind of humorous.
I suspect that we're all just giving advice for fun, without any real call for it. In which case, whoops, how very foolish of us.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:28 PM
96 - There may be some awkwardness for a while but it doesn't doom every future interaction between you and that person to awkwardness. I can think of at least one example of a time I've been shot down by a guy and gone on to resume a non-awkward friendship. Addressing the awkwardness head-on and talking about it can help.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:28 PM
They key is to start enjoying awkward situations.
This is true, actually; the way my friends and I say it is "It either goes well, or it makes a good story."
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:30 PM
Yeah, true enough, Becks.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:31 PM
advice, in almost all areas, is often pointless
I suspect that we're all just giving advice for fun, without any real call for it.
Actually I think the thing about advice is that when it works it's roundabout, and accidental. You can hear 12,000 things, and ignore 11,999 of them. And it's the thing you overheard while passing by your mom's sister's best friend that you'll take to heart. So giving advice, yeah, kind of pointless if you're actually hoping to have immediate impact. But in some collective cosmic sense, possibly obliquely helpful.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:33 PM
Reaching back, back into my more fraught past, my thought process vis a vis dating and asking out was this:
"I am the most loathesome person in any given room at any given time. I look funny and act weird and probably have offputting characteristics that I haven't even discovered yet. Other people consider me--when they consider me at all--so awful that they actively dread any contact with me. The only way I can salvage any shred of dignity from this situation is by being in the know about it, that is by being aware that I am horrible and therefore being courteous enough not to force any kind of company on anyone." (Although I am not actually horrible, as far as I can tell. And I don't think I was really horrible back then, either.)
A good fix for this is to ask out the shrinky, flinchy and low-self-esteemed (but only the ones you actually like, you know) because it's easier to believe that they won't run screaming.
A bad fix for this is to ask out only people to whom you feel superior so that you can be sure they won't run screaming. Or at least so that you can look down on them if they do. (And people..not, this time, me...do actually do this)
Posted by Frowner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:33 PM
13: But pressure for some specific sex act is fine?
I have a good (because about me messing up what could have been a good thing) and potentially ongoing story along the lines of the phone number on the receipt situation, but I'd have to adopt another alias to tell it.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:35 PM
Awkwardness is only one issue.
When a particularly unappealing guy shows interest in me, I'm not flattered. It makes me think I'm similarly unappealing, or why else would he feel emboldened to ask me out?
And I don't feel flattered when it's clear that the guy hitting on me hits on lots and lots of people.
There are many reasons not to be flattered by such attention.
Posted by dagger aleph | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:36 PM
"I am the most loathesome person in any given room at any given time. I look funny and act weird and probably have offputting characteristics that I haven't even discovered yet. Other people consider me--when they consider me at all--so awful that they actively dread any contact with me. The only way I can salvage any shred of dignity from this situation is by being in the know about it, that is by being aware that I am horrible and therefore being courteous enough not to force any kind of company on anyone."
Yow. This wins the "Most Depressing Statement I've Ever Identified Totally With" award.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:36 PM
And further to 106, the extra bonus thing about feeling this way about yourself is that it comes off to other people as stuck up.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:37 PM
Oh, 105, you have made all my worst fears a reality. Now I have grounds to believe that people really did dread contact with me all along...it's a good thing I've found a social circle with lower expectations.
Posted by Frowner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:38 PM
100: in my less reputable days, when my friends and I went out to score chicks--and almost always failed--we gathered Tales of Woe. A Tale of Woe was much more entertaining than any other sort of story.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:38 PM
Seems like a perfect time to mention that I followed the links to your flickr set, aleph, and you are super cute.*
*This is not an attempt to pick you up.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:40 PM
Fuck, I blew that joke. "Some general sex act," I meant to say.
93: On the east coast, that movie is on USA right now.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:40 PM
LizardBreath, mon semblable, ma soeur! Yes, it does come across as stuck up, as one discovers later, and then crying from the heart "But I just want you to like me!" doesn't help.
So, now that I've recovered a little from contemplating 105, I have a question: What makes someone so unappealing that being asked out by them is embarassing/unpleasant?
(Besides, that is, being asked out by someone who asks out anything in, as it were, a dress and uncomfortable shoes.)
Posted by Frowner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:42 PM
um, 112 should read "Besides being someone who asks out.."
Posted by Frowner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:44 PM
They key is to start enjoying awkward situations.
See my favorite AWB post, in which A White Bear and Mr. Wiremeshmother (mort Phutatorius' Chestnut) decide to have A Bad Time.
Posted by standpipe b | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:44 PM
The way I learned to ask people out was to convince myself that the point of asking wasn't to get a date, it was to get better at asking out interesting women. That way it is a success, no matter what happened. After a few months of asking any woman who I talked to for more than half an hour, I was over the difficulty.
Posted by Unfoggetarian: "Pause endlessly, then go in." (9) | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:45 PM
110: Did you not see that I already made the "your comment is funny and therefore sexy" joke? Nobody likes a cockblocker, ogged.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:46 PM
I am introverted but I am also pretty picky. I don't think that is too uncommon. I get the sense that dating the wrong person is more of a problem for an introvert than an extrovert.
Posted by joe o | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:48 PM
Did you not see that I already made the "your comment is funny and therefore sexy" joke?
But then she said that she didn't like it when unappealing guys came on to her. Read the signals, Timbot.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:48 PM
Re. awkwardness, Becks said what I was trying to get at. Yes, you'll feel a little embarrassed and awkward. It won't kill you. I mean, look. You can sit around concocting reasons why you're a loathsome person and be miserable. Or you can stick your neck out and try and be miserable. If you're going to be miserable either way, you might as well do the thing that runs the risk of maybe making you slightly less miserable or, god forbid, even pleased.
I'm totally pulling the tough love thing here. One of the wisest things my mom ever said to me was "everyone else is way too worried about what you think about them to really bother thinking much about you." It's generally true. If they think about you much, they either already like you (in which case, you're in) or they loathe you (which is probably obvious). Everyone in between is a tossup. They might say yes, in which case you have at least a chance. Or they might say no, in which case you feel embarrassed, but it's a momentary interaction, and as long as you don't hang around and moon forever, or keep asking, it's no big deal. Next time you see them, smile, and don't pigeonhole them for conversation, and they'll be grateful to you for knowing how to assuage their *own* fears of awkwardness.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:50 PM
110: Well, I don't put my ugly pictures up on the Internet. But thanks for the compliment.
112: It's more of a cumulative thing. If, in a given period of time, the *only* people who ever approach me are significantly older; obviously crazy; totally undiscriminating; smelly, whatever...I'm inclined to start wondering if I've been rating myself too highly.
Taken case by case, it's not really a problem. But when this is the trend, one is not flattered.
Posted by dagger aleph | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:50 PM
111.--I was a little confused, w/d.
112.--When I've felt bad about someone's asking me out, it's often some version of feeling guilty. It might have been something else when I was, like, twenty: some combination of sexual panic, peer pressure, and I don't know what.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:51 PM
118: That was clearly for you. "And I don't feel flattered when it's clear that the guy hitting on me hits on lots and lots of people," was for me. It's not enough to read, ogged, you have to understand.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:53 PM
I suspect that we're all just giving advice for fun, without any real call for it.
That's certainly true for me! And having said this, I want to defend 'be yourself' as good advice to keep in mind when trying to change aspects of your behavior. There are some ways in which people change for the better and some ways in which they would be ill-advised to try and I think 'be yourself' separates these categories.
Shyness is a good example. I don't think becoming extroverted is a good goal for a shy person. Controlling one's shyness rather than letting it be in control is a good goal.
Posted by neil | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:53 PM
114.--That is indeed a good post.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:55 PM
You can sit around concocting reasons why you're a loathsome person and be miserable. Or you can stick your neck out and try and be miserable.
Might be true, but, as someone said, it's roughly the same as telling a depressed person to "Buck up!" Easier said than done.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:55 PM
104: Okay, out with it, reyrd/reshaw.
Posted by sam k | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:56 PM
What's unappealing about being asked out? Being put on the spot by someone who, out of the blue, confesses to a long-standing crush that you had no clue of. It's a little too much for a pre-first date confession.
Or the contrary, being asked out by someone who's obviously just trying to be a player.
Or--and this is the tough one for the shy--being asked out in a way that sounds like it's actually a little hostile? You know, like the whole, "I'm sure you probably have better things to do and all that, but if you don't, I was thinking maybe you'd go to a movie with me, but it's cool if you don't want to, I was just wondering." Now that I'm older, I can interpret that kind of diffidence as shyness, but when I was in my 20s, it always seemed like it was something the guy was doing on a dare, or something. Like he was trying to talk you out of saying yes, even if you'd been inclined to.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 1:56 PM
125: Yeah, I kind of know that. But it's the way I talked myself out of being silly and shy when I was younger, honestly it is.
That and the old standby (which I still use) of asking myself, what's the worst-case scenario? Is it death? Well then, it isn't that bad.
Only now that I have a kid, the worst-case scenario is homelessness. Which luckily isn't very likely in most scenarios I'm nervous about, either.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:00 PM
Every time you fail in the game of love, a miniature john cusack alights in your soul. Eventually, you've got so many john cusacks in your soul, that you are just awesome, and can go eat ice cream.
But if you haven't got enough john cusacks, you aren't awesome enough to eat ice cream, so go out there and say something clever already.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:01 PM
sam k, I think I may just save it so I have a good story for the next meetup.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:04 PM
But be careful -- the John Cusacks can clog your arteries.
Posted by sam k | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:04 PM
128- homelessness has become worse than death??
Posted by Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:06 PM
106 and 107 are exactly right. B is also exactly right, and very wise, but the trick maybe is not so much listening to B--although that's certainly good--as finding yourself alone with a B-like person who is better at cutting through the bullshit than you are.
And re the exchange student bit upthread: I once had a real-life Swedish exchange student follow me into the bathroom, and later flop in my lap by the fire, and did basically nothing. Oh, the missed opportunities.
Posted by DaveL | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:09 PM
Oh! I actually have some pragmatic advice for asking people out! This may not work for you, and it doesn't always for me, but it has worked for me sometimes.
This is a psychological fake-out I use on myself early in the dating process, when I'm mortally afraid of rejection. I find some afternoon or evening activity I myself want to do, something that my better, more active self would just do spontaneously, like explore a new neighborhood or rent a kayak or whatever. Propose the specific activity to the person I'm trying to get closer to. Okay, but here's the kicker: if the other person says no, I try to make myself go do that thing anyway.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:10 PM
That is good advice.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:12 PM
134 has worked for me before.
Posted by sam k | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:13 PM
134 sounds good, but I'm not at all sure how I'm supposed to manage the threesome by myself.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:14 PM
134: What's nice about this is that it also makes it easier for a tending-toward-shy person to show authentic enthusiasm. "Hey, there is this great exhibit that I'm going to go to on Sunday -- would you like to come along?"
Posted by Witt | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:14 PM
Very interesting post and comments. As a loner with a few very good friends I have always sucked at the whole networking thing of getting a huge number of aquintances to be exploited. And thus I verily remain a virgin to this day. I don't really see an answer to my problems though, alternate ways dating seem to be even worse for a shy guy. I do like electronic music so I guess 43 is kind of promising.
Oh and ben, if you don't have any good plans yet for your trip to Finland, mail me to meet a really uncool and socially inept engineering student. Great fun awaits you!
Now I think I'll just go "clubbing" to a "rave" since I'm a little drunk and it's 29 degrees in my apartment and 18 outside . What the fuck is up with that?
Posted by ksii | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:16 PM
134 is also nice because then the askee doesn't feel like they have to impress/entertain the asker over dinner.
Posted by yoyo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:18 PM
Dinner is too fraught for a first date, I've usually found. Also: too expensive.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:22 PM
Though it seems to me that 134 requires a proviso, make it something the other person might plausibly like. I usually figure it would not be good to ask someone along to one of my free-jazz shows if I don't have any reason to think they might like it. (Further research shows that this is not true.) Though I did know a very cute woman who was always up for experimental film; though I didn't know that until we'd been on another date and then become just friends.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:28 PM
For what to do once you've secured the date, baa's advice is great.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:28 PM
Hey, ksii just asked out Wolfson.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:29 PM
Movies are totally unacceptable early dates, but theater is great. Intermission can make for a good preview kiss.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:36 PM
I'd be interested in a list of good NYC first-dates-that-aren't-dinners. About my only thought would be wandering aimlessly until we find something we want to do. Not because there aren't events around New York that I want to go to, but because most of them aren't good for talking, and I don't see how your first date is supposed to work unless you're talking for a while.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:39 PM
132: Yes. The prospect of being completely without friends or anywhere to turn, with PK in tow, and no place safe, is worse than the prospect of dying.
JM's strategy is a good one.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:41 PM
141: Dinner can be an okay first date if you're doing the cooking, especially for men. I recall some sage saying recently that men who cook are men who get laid.
Posted by jmcq | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:44 PM
The thing about the non-talking first-date event is that you can go somewhere afterwards--coffee, a drink, dessert--and *talk about the event*. Which is a great help.
I would amend 138. Don't say "would you like to come along," which is ambiguous. Say "would you come with me?" That's an invitation, rather than a maybe-date, maybe-just-this-person-is-bored-and-wants-company thing.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:46 PM
146 - Drinks on the roof of the Met during the summer is nice. Shows at the Upright Citizens Brigade are usually short, funny, cheap, and give you something to talk about. Also, I don't know about a first date, but I've always wanted to find someone who thought a great date idea was a picnic in Green-Wood Cemetery (the most beautiful place in NYC, IMO). Alas, most people I suggest that to think I'm insane.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:46 PM
146.--Well, apparently there's a corpse-flower blossoming for the first time in like 50 years at the Brooklyn Botanical Garden. That would make a good quest.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:47 PM
146: in New York? It's an embarassment of riches. Small galleries, coffee shops, washington square park, an old bookstore, offering to squeegee the windows of unspecting drivers caught in traffic. There's a reason why like 90% of romantic comedies are set in New York.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:47 PM
You could ask someone out for dessert. This involves you knowing a place with great dessets, obviously.
Posted by Blume | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:50 PM
r
Posted by Blume | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:51 PM
Becks, my first date with my ex of many years was an anthropological exhibit of human relics. We had a good time.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:52 PM
You could take the ferry to Ellis Island. Ferries are festive, except when there's a transit strike and it's 20 degrees out.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:55 PM
Well, apparently there's a corpse-flower blossoming for the first time in like 50 years at the Brooklyn Botanical Garden
Too late! It's ceased to smell, and has started to curl in on itself and go brown. It looks like an undistinguished cabbage.
Posted by Felix | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:56 PM
"Ferries are festive"
So what you really want to do is, just spend the day hanging out in Chelsea.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 2:57 PM
I agree with 149. Event plus coffee/drinks before and after can be nice.
I disagree with 148 for a first date. A fairly popular chick lit author agrees with me that cooking dinner on a date = expected sex. (Becks has also mentioned this somewhere.) Too much pressure.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:00 PM
hey becks, its a dreaded sunny day. would you come meet me at the Green=Wood cemetary gates?
Posted by yoyo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:01 PM
So what you really want to do is, just spend the day hanging out in Chelsea.
Oh, if only some straight guy had taken me on a date to Big Cup. If only!
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:03 PM
Big Cup.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:07 PM
I can't read all of these comments, but my advice to teofilo is this: Ask out someone you genuinely like. That sounds more obvious than it is -- I've known guys who ask women out almost indiscriminately, or who ask out girls just because they think they'll have a chance. It's obvious to a girl when she's been asked out for one of these reasons, and it's not flattering. But ask out a woman because you truly like her (because she's funny, or super-smart, or weird, or has pretty smiley eyes), and at the very least, she'll be flattered and happy that she was noticed for her specialness. And she's more likely to like you back for it.
Posted by jms | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:08 PM
Felix beat me to it, but my understanding is that it bloomed at about 2:00 AM and the smell dissipated very soon thereafter. I guess the New York Botanical Gardens (the Bronx one's) wouldn't be too bad if you wanted to spend a lot of time talking on the train/staring awkwardly at each other.
152: I would do/have done all of those things as subsequent dates.
153: I know at least three good dessert places.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:08 PM
Shit, I missed the corpse-flower?
Another possibility are all of those bizillion outdoors events. Last night the Met did "La Traviata" in Central Park. Last summer, my honey and I saw the Merce Cunningham Co. in Battery Park. There's a series called "The River to River Festival" you might check out. You might find an events calendar on the NY Parks department website. Also, Harlem Week seems to last all of August, but events can be hard to hear about unless you see the flyers up here.
If you're into this sort of thing, I recently heard about people bouldering in Central Park. I think the community website is nyclimbs.com.
I agree with Matt in 159. And, actually, I pretty much equate inviting somebody home with invitating them to maybe, probably, have sex. (Insert disclaimers.)
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:11 PM
110: She's even cuter in person.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:11 PM
"Have done" applying, of course, to the walk around Washington Square Park one. Squeegeing is old hat.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:11 PM
Teo, one of the advantages of the relationship-free life (TM) is that it's easy to attain, and you don't have to listen to so much advice.
Every day "Stay out of relationships" is at the top of your to-do list, and every night it's checked off. Instant success.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:14 PM
I would have done so. In another, gayer life.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:14 PM
160 - Were you in New York, sure.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:18 PM
We could have taken our place in gay hell, so happily.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:22 PM
And, actually, I pretty much equate inviting somebody home with invitating them to maybe, probably, have sex. (Insert disclaimers.)
You say that like it's a bad thing. Is this the "How to Date Without Having Sex" thread?
Posted by jmcq | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:22 PM
Ok, I actually do many of these things, and just tend not to think of them on the rare occasions when a young woman foolishly decides to go out with me for the first time.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:23 PM
Then we could have said, "we'll always have gay hell." But now all that can be said is we might have gone to gay hell, if given the chance. More's the pity.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:27 PM
I can't read all of these comments
Usually I try to be welcoming, but if you're saying that at 163 you may not be cut out for this place. It's a vocation, dude.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:29 PM
Don't scare him off; 163 was good advice.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:30 PM
If I say "Kidding," SCMT will jump down my throat for condescending to the noobs, so I won't.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:30 PM
I'm trying!
Posted by jms | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:30 PM
See? I can't win.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:31 PM
When I posted 175 I had not read the rest of the comment. It is, indeed, wonderful advice.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:32 PM
I think it's SCMT who condescends to the n00bs. Him and Garrison Keillor.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:32 PM
176: And in a similar vein, fuck someone you genuinely want to fuck.
See how easy this is?
Posted by DaveL | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:32 PM
So that's what I've been doing wrong. Thanks, internets!
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:33 PM
172: I am not so confident as to ask someone something that amounts to "Let's have sex" before we've actually been on a date. Those who are probably don't need these suggestions.
Posted by Anonymous | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:34 PM
Then we could have said, "we'll always have gay hell."
And yet somehow, I feel can and should say this anyway. And I believe Rufus Wainwright's colon agrees with me.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:34 PM
we can, that is
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:35 PM
You bet.
Posted by Colon | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:37 PM
Let's hope so. If it disagrees, we'll never hear the end of it.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:38 PM
184 me.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:40 PM
(And I'm going to guess jms is not a him.)
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:41 PM
I am not so confident as to ask someone something that amounts to "Let's have sex" before we've actually been on a date.
Well, you wouldn't with just anyone, but it has been known to work. Incidentally, I recommend the salade niçoise.
Posted by jmcq | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:45 PM
190: So it would seem, on rereading 163. I had thought it was for some reason, though; maybe I was confusing her with jmcq.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:47 PM
I was also getting interference from jmcq.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:52 PM
Yeah, along with "Normal Looking Names", "Unpronounceable Jumbles of Letters" are some of my less favorite pseuds. I find them very hard to attach personalities to, and hard to distinguish from similar jumbles. (But I'm just cranky like that. No one should feel bad because I disapprove of your name.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:55 PM
No worries.
Posted by mttw | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:56 PM
Yeah, no problem.
Posted by tfl | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:57 PM
Sheesh, this place is tough.
Posted by jms | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 3:59 PM
Yes, I should have put more thought into my nondescript and now potentially confusing moniker. Incidentally, teofilo, you may note that I somehow went from being the painfully shy sort of person that B crushes under her heel into someone who just up and invited women over for dinner, meaning sex. So a bright future awaits. (I later got married, but you might not want to take it that far for a bit.)
Posted by jmcq | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:01 PM
I go out to drive somewhere, get stuck in a bit of traffic, and now there are 100s of comments here and elsewhere. Most of 93 seems right. I haven't read past that yet.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:05 PM
jmh: I dub thee "Alligator Shortpants"
jmcq: I dub thee "Calliope Balloon Ride"
Rise and comment.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:06 PM
jms, that is. I can't tell you people straight.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:07 PM
Jmcq, I apologize for treading on your toes. And for crying out loud, who is jmh?
Posted by jms | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:08 PM
202 before I read 201, obv.
Posted by jms | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:08 PM
The first jmx to change his/her name gets a bouquet from the Mineshaft.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:11 PM
eb: Usually I try to be welcoming, but if you're saying that at 199 you may not be cut out for this place. It's a vocation, dude.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:13 PM
Well, see, I have this thing about balloons. Not really a phobia, more like a mild revulsion. But what the hell, I'll take Alligator Shortpants if jmh, or jms, rejects it.
202: Quite alright. Likewise to you.
Posted by jmcq | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:13 PM
In composing 205 I realized that the main reason (aside from confusion with jmcq) that I pegged jms as male was probably Weiner's use of "dude."
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:15 PM
I actually rejected "..., man" as insufficiently gender-neutral. Chicks can be duded, right?
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:16 PM
I think jmcq and jms (and eb and all those other jumble people) should adopt pseudonyms that use the letters as an acronym. That way there's some continuity, but their pseuds become more memorable.
For example:
Just Make Coffee Quickly
Junior Mint Snorter
Every Body's
Or whatever. Suggestions from the Mineshaft?
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:17 PM
"Dude" is nominally unisex, but I experience it as assuming maleness.
Posted by standpipe b | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:20 PM
Chicks can be duded, right?
Of course.
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:21 PM
208: True, I think. OTOH, my 12-year-old surfer dude nephew got his ass chewed for addressing his mother as "brah," so it can be pushed too far.
Posted by DaveL | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:22 PM
That's not to say I don't use it unisexually myself.
Posted by standpipe b | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:22 PM
209:
Jupiter Mars Ceres Quaoar
Jupiter Mars Saturn
Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt
Posted by Felix | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:24 PM
Is it really the case that no one sees how "yes" can be a problem for certain levels of shy? You guys all need to get out less and broaden your horizons.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:26 PM
I once found a dog and took it back to the address on its tag, and the young guy who opened the door looked as though he'd just had about a dozen huge bong hits. All he said was "dude," like seven or eight times, but I knew from his inflection that he was really saying, "Oh, my dog -- I didn't even realize he'd gotten out. Thanks!"
Posted by jmcq | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:27 PM
There is a fine scene in the first series of The Wire, in which Bunk and McNulty analyze a crime scene, using only variations of the well-known Anglo-Saxon fricative.
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:31 PM
215: I see it, but I try not to think about it.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:32 PM
212: D'ya think he would've done better with "babe"?
(I expected 211 to go here.)
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:34 PM
eb should stay eb; I finally got the eb/ac thing sorted out in my head and can't handle a shift now.
212 is totally hilarious. I'd so kick PK's ass if he called me "brah," too, just on general principles. Though he does call me "Mr. Mama" from time to time.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:34 PM
That's not to say I don't use it unisexually myself.
"It" can be used unisexually, that's true; I find it often causes offense anyway.
Posted by Felix | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:34 PM
217: That's a great scene.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:35 PM
215: Of course. But one step at a time, grasshopper. Get the yes, then get back to us and we'll tell you how to behave on a date.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:37 PM
214: Jupiter Mars Ceres Quaoar is a bit of a mouthful, and the first two parts suggest a more testosterone-heavy character than suits me. So I'm just going to start commenting under my own name, starting now.
Posted by Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:53 PM
Now that's a pseudonym. May I call you Jeez?
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 4:59 PM
That's an awesome pseud.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 5:00 PM
Also, a friend of mine once said she thought going to Target could make an interesting first date for her.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 5:04 PM
227: She was flirting with you.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 5:06 PM
She was seeing someone at the time, and other friends of ours were present, one of whom brought up the idea of going on a date at Target. I had, in fact, earlier in our friendship asked her if she wanted to get dinner (which she did) or wanted to see a movie (which she did) but each time she seemed to interpret that as asking whether she wanted to go to dinner or a movie with other friends of ours, because each time her answer was, "yes, and I'll see so and so would also like to come along."
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 5:14 PM
if
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 5:15 PM
speaking of brazen pick up attempts, a guy just saw me reading my weight lifting book on the train, and passed me his name, number, and email on a paper, with the explanation that he was a personal trainer. I told him I had no money more than once, and he kept telling me not to worry about it, so I assume he was trying to pick me up. He told me he would give me a nutritional consultation and help me with my fitness goals. What I really want to do is have someone in the gym with me to correct my form, but I don't know if Crunch will let him in. Maybe he can get a guest pass.
Anyway, I was looking him up and down and thinking I would sleep with him, and further thinking I would especially sleep with him if I got personal training out of it, although his pickup attempt kind of went awry when he showed me pictures of him in a bodybuilding competition on his ipod. He looked good in clothes, but kind of gruesome oiled up in a speedo. However, I want to email him. Maybe he can train me somewhere other than Crunch.
lesson: becoming a personal trainer is a good way to get women.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 5:15 PM
lesson: becoming a personal trainer is a good way to get women
Damn, I would thought the lesson was just to always carry around a picture of yourself dressed in a Speedo and covered in Crisco.
Posted by DaveL | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 5:21 PM
144: Sure though I think I'd prefer to lose my virginity with an actual wo/man. In other news Rättö & Lehtisalo at Tavastia review: trippy stuff but I prefer either Circle or Kuusumun Profeetta. Just barely worth the admission fee (6 euros and a half an hour wait in the queue). My apartment has cooled to 27 degrees (Celcius you Great Satan American oppressors) so it's possible to sleep at last.
Posted by ksii | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 6:37 PM
I'm sorry about my jumble-of-letters name here, too. My first name is way too common here at the 'Shaft, and I don't have an obvious nickname. Maybe I'll start commenting as, like, Captain Awesome or something.
Posted by mrh | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 6:42 PM
234: If it's the same first name as the various Matts and Ttams, all you need to do to avoid confusion is to reshuffle the letters a little. ATTM.
Posted by DaveL | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 6:55 PM
Another Matt? It's like some sort of freakish infestation.
No, seriously, don't let it bother you. The only reason I complain is that it makes it harder for me to keep people straight, and I'm afraid of snubbing someone I've been 'talking' to for months. Call yourself whatever you want.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 6:56 PM
each time her answer was, "yes, and I'll see so and so would also like to come along."
Oh yes, I am quite familiar with this sort of thing. The perils of being shunted by default into "friend" classification.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 6:57 PM
No no, someone needs to regulate the names. If only Tripp were around.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 6:58 PM
It's like some sort of freakish infestation.
BOOGABOOGABOOGA!!!!!
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 6:59 PM
236: mrh has been here for quite some time under various monikers.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:00 PM
I used to be "Matt #3," but Matt F pointed out that I was actually considerably farther down the line.
Posted by mrh | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:00 PM
224: A bouquet for Jesus McQueen. Welcome again to the Mineshaft!
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:00 PM
We've been over this before.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:02 PM
233: That's like 80 in real degrees, you freedom-hating, umlaut-loving socialist. The Great Satan considers that perfectly comfortable for such wholesome pursuits as baseball, tax cuts and the suppression of atheism. Fords not fjords, bee-yotch.
Posted by Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:06 PM
243: I like HiveMatt as a name.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:08 PM
Fords not fjords, bee-yotch.
I cannot think of a better catchphrase for a commenter named Jesus McQueen. Well done, sir.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:08 PM
242: Never had one before. Do you have a recipe?
Posted by Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:08 PM
247: We're back to "lots of butter and garlic," methinks. For that sucker, about three pounds of butter and five of garlic should do the trick.
Posted by DaveL | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:10 PM
Dibs.
Posted by HiveMatt | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:11 PM
Bouquet for HiveMatt. Resistance is teh futile!
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:19 PM
did jmcq's personality changed completely when he adopted his new pseud?
Posted by mcmc | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:23 PM
mrh, I'd be happy if you changed your tag to "Mr. H". I think it would be quite memorable.
Posted by Clownæsthesiologist | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 7:24 PM
Because caving to pressure is what I do best, I'll change my moniker as well. With thanks to M. M/lls above, I'll take Junior Mint.
Posted by Junior Mint (formerly jms) |