He's just not that into her...

Yep. Condolences.

I'm going to agree with comment 1 there. And even if he was, he sounds like he'd be a frustrating relationship all the same.

Just not that into her. Friends only. Maybe drunken sex.

Yup, that's what I was afraid of. He has, however, repeatedly said that he thinks I"m a lot smarter than he is. It's totally untrue, but he does seem to think it.

I don't remember which.

Well that seems like it could be important.

He also said that someone from the hospital had invited him out a while ago and that it was just too soon. Then he said either "I just wasn't ready" or "I'm just not ready."

This is probably the key part of the entire post. If he's still in a furnitureless apartment, he's probably still picking through the wreckage. People on the rebound should be approached with great caution.

Yeah, just not that into her. (Sorry, BG.)

I am famously clueless in this area, but I do not see how you can conclude on this evidence that he is not into her. In particular, neither love nor friendship appears full-blown [insert ATM joke here] after a few encounters.

I say, if you like him, relax and see what happens. Maybe a friend--can't have to many of those--maybe more. How can you know now?

I am particularly clueless on the right modes of advance, but I know there was a thread on this a year or so ago. I think there was a lot of good advice there.

5: I sort of doubt that he's the type to go for drunken sex. He's kind of embarrassed to have admitted that he lived with his girlfriend to a bunch of Episcopalians, but we're all pretty liberal and don't care.

He also seemed to think that arranged marriages weren't such a terrible idea in certain cultures. I had said something about the number of people who seem so desperate to get married that they just marry anyone without waiting for the right person. He said something about there not being just one right person. I certainly agree with him about that, and I think that there is an underlyign truth to what he's talking about. Romantic love isn't necessarily the best recipe for long-lasting happiness.

He tends to remember what I say and write.

A sure sign that he is very interested.

"He has, however, repeatedly said that he thinks I"m a lot smarter than he is."

Don't all reasonably intelligent men say that to reasonably intelligent women?

It is easy, often true, and is received much better than "you have a great ass!"

I'm reluctant to be as dismissive as 1-3, and I dunno about 4. I think it's clear he's less interested than she is, but it's far from clear to me that he's actually not interested. There are an awful lot of positive signs in that history, although the last few weeks are less promising.

But am I wrong to think that doctor-types tend to be like this? As in, randomly in touch and occasionally oblivious?

I would not give up, but I would make an effort to reconnect - get back to where you were a month or two ago - before getting direct. If you can't reconnect, then you have to let it go, but there's no reason (IMO) to renew communication with an ultimatum/confession.

He may actually be interested and not ready. It happens. I'd hold off on the speeches, pursue other options, but not foreclose anything happening in the future. But that's hard to do.

5: You could prove him wrong by pushing it. (Otherwise 7:)

re: 12

I've never said it.

re: 9

Well, most people tend to make more of an effort to see someone they really like. If I really liked someone, even if work scheduling was hard, I'd sure as hell make sure something concrete happened a lot quicker than 4 or 5 months after I met the person, and I think that goes for a most people.

I'm with Idealist. I don't think it's at all clear that he's not into you, although Apo's also right that he may just not be ready for a relationship yet. Why not just approach it as a friendship that could blossom?

I would hesitate to discount a friendship growing into a relationship.

However, that is one of those situations that you just have to leave alone. Wait to see if he ever makes any effort.

7: 1.) He broke up with her a little more than a year ago and moved into a furnished apartment.

2.) He was finishing up a fellowship and didn't know where he'd get a job.

3.) He got a job at the hospital where he did his fellowship and just bought the apartment which he is now looking to furnish. He stretched himself a bit to buy an apartment in a really nice part of town and doesn't have much money left for furniture. He was telling me over coffee once that he had been to a home show and that he couldn't afford anything there. I told him that he might look into estate sales if he didn't mind used stuff. He thought that that was a great idea.

He is also quite shy.

12: What's wrong with BG's ass?

Y'all seem wierdly romantic in an old-fashioned holding hands after church kind of way.

C'mon, if you're really hot for someone, you want to make it happen now. Not let it drift inconsequentially for months.

20:

I don't know. Heebie is the resident expert.

21: I'm not sure she's looking for the monkey-love, which is time-sensitive. If this guy seems great, waiting a few months is totally reasonable.

Obviously the solution is to have him cockslap you in a public restroom. That really lets you know where you stand with a person.

Y'all seem wierdly romantic in an old-fashioned holding hands after church kind of way.

I am guilty of this. I am not convinced that it is a bad thing.

There's no right way, and you'll have to tread carefully, but a pleasant forthrightness might encourage him. I agree that he seems very interested.

we should do it again some time later in the spring and that we could bring others along--if I thought that would be fun.

Either he's not that into you, or he's too clueless about it to ever make a move.

ttaM is right. It's not that there are a lot of bad signs, but there's a distinct absense of very good signs, and those are the real clue as to whether someone is interested. And who wants to date a doctor, anyway? You should marry a doctor only if you want a comfortable life without your spouse around to bother you much.

re: 23

I'm not saying waiting is never right. Just that usually, even if you are waiting, you have much more concrete signs that something will eventually happen.

* although personally I don't have the patience

I didn't read the post, but I can't imagine it being worth all this trouble.

Just give it a try and if you get rejected you can move on.

25->24.

10: Perhaps he wants a wife more than a girlfriend?

20: Probably nothing, though I don't really know, because I don't spend a lot fo time looking at it.

Y'all seem weirdly romantic in an old-fashioned holding hands after church kind of way.

This is true, but I'm weirdly old-fashioned in a lot of ways. We both like the same architecture.

He went on about his decision to buy the place he bought, because he was fascinated by the process of decision-making. We made a list of positive reasons, and then he said that there had to be negative options. I said that it was possible that he was really just a snob. And he said, "Thank you. Everyone else would say, 'of course, you're not a snob.'"

I said that I'm a snob about a lot of things education especially and cars too, because I totally look down on people who drive what I consider to be flashy cars.

32: I've thought that too. I said something about that in a comment to that thread on the sleazy date-rape guy. He's 5 years older than I am, and I have a feeling that he might want to start a family in the next couple of years.

I would never say this to him, but I could totally see myself marrying him.

Both your friends are right though.

28: Friend M thinks that doctors are great, partly because her Dad is one. And he was very solicitous with advice when I couldn't sleep.

He is kind of geeky and may just be clueless. He totally didn't pick up on the fact that a company called Pr/ide Mort/gages, based in Providence no less, had gay roots.

Thought 1: Hey, cool, I bet this is BG.
Thought 2: Wow, the tuxedo thing makes it seem like he really ikes her.
Thought 3: Man, it's hard to start dating a doctor.

I don't agree with the idea that he isn't into you. I think he's into you, but working 80 hours weeks + paperwork, so it'll probably be a hassle to try to start anything. My friends who are doctors are either single, or were married before they started residency and never see their spouses. He probably could deal with a wife because he'd marry someone who knows him and they could deal with the long hours (or not, doctors divorce a lot) but it's a hard time to try to nurture a new relationship.

Besides the smart, attractive, successful doctor part, this guy kind of reminds me of myself: Shy, clueless, not out for monkey lovin', etc. But even I would have made a move by now.

However, 35 is exactly right. That is not a reason not to ask him to cockslap you in a public restroom whatever; it's a reason not to get your hopes up.

36:I might not have picked that up either, with less cause. This really feels worthwhile and rewarding to me.

The other important detail.

(1.) He's really curious (as am I) and interested in research.

(2.) His specialty is ped/iat/ric.

This in 38 is very true:

it's a reason not to get your hopes up.

I really wish that teo were here now. I feel that his perspective would be really valuable.

36: One is what one eats.

I'm with Sam K in that the guy reminds me of me, but I probably wouldn't have made a move yet (assuming I really was interested) -- geeky guys can be *very* immobile. In principle, I think the idea of explicitly asking him if he wants to get romantic is the right one. I'd also tend to think the friendship should be a bit more intense before that happens, but then, given his time constraints, that might just not be in the cards.

In my limited experience, people in ped/iat/rics are in fact very family-oriented, and would do what it took to make the right relationship work.

my first inclination was to agree with 1 et al, but on reflection it seems like he might actually be interested but be a shy spazz/be insanely busy/etc. worth pursuing, I think. maybe just straight-up invite him on an obviously date-date at time t? and then try making out with him at the end.

Not making a move for months just seems ... futile.

I understand shyness, but c'mon, that length of time just makes the mind boggle.

It really seems like he's trying to be nice but is sending signals he is not interested in more.

- He offered to come for a couple of hours after his dinner, though he'd be without his tuxedo and couldn't guarantee that he wouldn't be paged. I should feel free to page him. (This is a surefire way to seem friendly, helpful, but still know you'll be turned down.)

- He sent his condolences and said, "Much as I wish it were over, I'm on call through the end of the week." (He could have at least come over to sit with you.)

- He said, sure, but that he was busy on Tuesdays for the next several weeks, but he could do dinner that night (a Friday) or that we could have brunch some Sunday after church; the implication was that there would be other people around if we did the brunch thing. (He's willing to meet, on his terms, and he wants other people around.)

- John also said at some point, "If you meet my Mom--not that you'd meet my Mom..." (He's basically marking a line between you and his mother.)

- we should do it again some time later in the spring and that we could bring others along--if I thought that would be fun. (Again, he is being polite in saying someday you can hang out again, but adding extra people into the mix.)

- There were a couple of e-mails around Easter. There was one sort of embarrassing e-mail that I sent, and I haven't heard back since. (He hasn't emailed you in two weeks? That is not a good sign, either. Even busy people can email.)

I really don't think he is interested. That is his loss, not yours. I wouldn't try to do anything else- this entire saga is about you accommodating yourself to him without any effort on his part. Do you really want to date someone who isn't willing to make even the tiniest effort to meet you halfway?

Yeah, after a little more thought... he's a doctor, he's at a hospital, he's on call, so he probably gets one weekend per month free... if he's the geeky nervous sort, and he's working up the courage, he probably is having a hard time finding the time to coordinate the courage with the schedule.

I'd go for. Worst case, you don't get to be friends, but you barely see him due to his schedule anyway.

He cares about architecture? Sounds like a good, good man.

My only doubts (as expressed before) revolve aruond the recent silence. Are you worried about it too, or does it just feel like Dr-busyness? As long as you don't think he's been blowing you off, I think you focus on the connections made before and chalk up the last month of lower activity to his schedule.

It's a shame you're Episcopalian. If you were Pentecostal, you could feign speaking his name in tongues. Guys love that shit.

Yes, to 46.

46 can all be explained either by his actual work conditions or lack of confidence.

It sounds to me like he's maybe sorta interested, but not interested enough. It's just all too difficult. He's not going out of his way at all to make himself available.

People, if someone is into you, they make time for you. And sending an email does not require a lot of time.

But if it were attributable to his work conditions, he would still be offering alternatives-- 'oh, I can't make it at this time, but what about this other time instead?'

Yes, winna is correct. But BG, it sounds like you're REALLY crushing on this guy. It might be worth being more aggressive, if only to be certain that you didn't let him pass you by.

re: 50

I just feel like shouting WTF. Why are people searching for explanations? 5 months? No serious effort made to initiate/pursue any kind of real romantic/sexual/intimate contact?

What other explanation do you need? I don't to harsh on what sounds like quite a nice friendship but really ...

In light of the fact that the breakup was a year ago, I say not that interested. I'd originally thought it was more recent. If you want you could certainly ask him on a date, point blank, to put any doubts to rest.

No, it can't.

If he were interested, he would have been emailing, even if he couldn't meet. He would have been willing to hang out even if he's on call.

I am on call, although my job hasn't the cachet of being a doctor. If I want to see someone, I tell them I'm on call and we do things anyway until I get called. I can't drink, but I can still be there.

BG is too good to waste her time on someone who hasn't demonstrated any attempts to work around his scheduling constraints. What will being with someone who won't even come over to sit with you after a family member passed be like? Pretty damn sucky, that's what.

geeky guys can be *very* immobile.

I don't think this can be emphasized enough. I'm not even all that geeky (at least in terms of social capabilities), but I never realized that a girl I was fooling around with was interested in me romantically until she told me she was done waiting for me. There were complicating circumstances, but still, I marvel at my cluelessness.

When I invited my wife-to-be on our first "date," I thought I was being ultra-smoove, when, in fact, I didn't even actually ask her to join me at the lecture - I just let her know I'd be there. To me, I'd done great; to her, she didn't know what the hell I was doing. It worked out, obv, but I'm just glad her encouraging office-mate wasn't like winna in 46.

57 to 50

Boy, doesn't look like we're going to get comity on this one....

"I'm not even all that geeky ... but I never realized that a girl I was fooling around with was interested in me romantically until she told me she was done waiting for me. "

Sometimes, and I say this with affection, on unfogged I feel like an anthropologist in a foreign land.

JRoth's 58 could have been posted by me. But you know, this doctor guy is middle-aged (?) and has romantic experience, unlike me. He could be doing more to spend time with you.

58: There is of course a risk of our projecting too much, but I agree completely. The relationships that seem hardest to get going can really take off fast, and then leave everyone, including the guy, marveling at what took so long. Really worth a shot.

Look, shy is one thing, and deliberate passivity is another. He offered to hang out in the coming months. He's making meeting opportunity offers, just on limited terms (later in the spring?! what is that about?) and in the company of other people.

He's a Episcopalian geek with a busy schedule. So, he's not jonesing for casual sex, he's shy, and he's working long hours.
Nothing bad comes of asking him out on a date.

54 is totally true. I'm thinking that I should either do something or get it out of my system.

52: He does send e-mails, but he's also a really slow reader.

46: this entire saga is about you accommodating yourself to him without any effort on his part. This is mostly true, but he's very polite about that.

Louisa was having dinner parties on two consecutive nights as a going-away party. I was invited to whichever one I could get to. The weather was really bad that Friday--disgusting sleat--and I e-mailed to ask him whether I was crazy to brave the elements. He hadn't RSVP'd, but he came. He was too clueless to offer me a ride home, but it's also polite that he didn't want to break up the party, since he was leaving early.

Further data point. He's a bit more awkward around me than around other people. His eyebrow pretty much always flashes when we see eachother--or even if we walk past eachother when it would be inappropriate to stop, but in a large group setting he almost never looks at me directly, but I think that thee are furtive glances.

You are in a foreign land, and even those of us with the most in common with you ordinarily can feel it on this issue. Not all Americans, but many of our kind of people, are just like this.

Asking him out would definitely answer our question.

That's a sort of comity, right?

"I'm not even all that geeky ... but I never realized that a girl I was fooling around with was interested in me romantically until she told me she was done waiting for me. "

I'll never forget the time in high school when a girl spent an entire party sitting in my lap, caressing me while talking to me. I found out later that she assumed I wasn't interested in her, since other than talking with her I didn't do anything to make any sort of move. But of course I was interested in her, I just hadn't picked up on her subtle cues.

Although, in my defense, there were drugs involved. But still.

Whatever, send him an email. What's to lose, exactly?

It sounds to me like he is interested in you, maybe even a lot, but is too intimidated by you to even think about you in a romantic or sexual way. Like, he might be a great guy to flirt with, drink with, and go to dinner with, but if he isn't returning your flirtation by now, it's probably because he's never considered the possibility of dating someone like you.

This is going to turn into a non-affair. I had one that lasted two years in my MA program with a guy whose office was next to mine. For two years, I probably saw more of him than anyone else. We went to the gym together, the library, coffee, drinks, dinner, everything. The whole time, I was like, "Obviously, he thinks I'm totally his dream girl." There was even mutually acknowledged painful thrummings of sexual tension. But the guy just hadn't ever thought about dating outside his type, which was willowy dark-haired divorcees who would worship him. I think now that it never even occurred to him that I would have imagined there was a possibility of something between us.

I'll never forget the time in high school when a girl spent an entire party sitting in my lap, caressing me while talking to me.

Yeah, I've been there. When I was about 14.

I went through a similar situation recently. There's a girl I know through church. Mutual friends and family encouraged us to go out. I called her. We did. I paid. It was unambiguously date-y. After date number three, I gathered the strength to stutter something about wanting a serious relationship. Her response? "Eehhh."

But you know what? It only sucked for about 90 seconds. Just call him.

If you're not confident, you're going to try to make efforts, but not make offers that are 'too foward' or risk coming off like you want to hook up.

72- well, right. It's different with this being a middle aged guy. I was just sharing stories.

It only sucked for about 90 seconds.

That's not too bad for someone who wasn't interested at all.

As a person with a similar schedule and situation as "John", I'm going to vote that he's actually into you, but would rather concentrate on work and flirting-and-forgeting than commit to anything serious-- for now. Flirting and friendship: ok, but if you ask him for time and any sort of regular commitment he'll run. I'd give him 6 months to get his stressful life in order and realize what he's actually missing out on, BG.

I tend to agree with winna. But seriously, send an email, phone call, ask him out - what's to lose? I mean how much time have you spent analyzing this situation? Time, I think, better spent gathering some courage and asking him out. Maybe we're wrong, but if we're not it doesn't sound like you see him all that frequently anyway, so the embarrassment factor would probably be low.

Whatever, send him an email titty pictures. What's to lose, exactly?

You'd know for sure then.

77: SIX MONTHS?

76: I dunno. The only uncomfortable part was the first part of the conversation. It was the uncertainty that was getting to me.

What's to lose is that men in this situation can be unwittingly pretty cruel.

Ixnay on the waiting and pining for six months. Ask him out, if he says no, move on, date other people, and if in six months he has his shit together and you're still single, see what happens.

I suspect the 'wait till late spring' thing might be that fellowship interview season is going on right now, and if he's trying to score one, every free moment he has is flying to interviews.

Is he that into you: probably not.

Should you ask him out: yes.

I can't call him, because I don't have his telephone number. I'm sure that I'll see him again, and if I say anything, it will be in person.

I'm not afraid to e-mail him about other things.

He's 36 and totally embarrassed about the furniture thing--too embarrassed to have his parents come up to visit him.

I appreciate shame. It's an emotion with which I'm really familiar.

When he was trying to see if he could get a different loan, he called Pr/ide Mort/gages, and the broker there asked him if he was gay. He was pretty floored by the question in that context and also really adamant about telling me that he was 100% heterosexual. I said, "Well, your voice is a bit high, but why did he ask you anyway?"

I recommend an epistolary relationship.

I think that the guy being geeky, socially inept, an MD on call, and on the rebound can explain a lot of his puzzling behavior. For that reason I don't think that BG should be too discouraged. IE, his unresponsiveness is a different thing than it would be with a guy who had a rich social life and great social skills.

I think that BG should take the initiative, put her cards on the table, and be prepared to move on if nothing happens. There's a chance that the guy just isn't capable of being the one to make the move. The friendship probably won't really survive if that fails, but the friendship per se doesn't seem like much anyway.

There are specific problems with geeky socially inept significant others, of course, and a lot of MDs are so career-obsessed that they barely are human beings. However, those are things to figure out later.

The inteepretive framework for the above should be: a.) relationships are bad, but it's better to marry than to burn, and b.) all relationship advice coming from the Mineshaft is wrong.

Like Abelard and Heloise.

69: Christ, I'd forgotten that 58 wasn't even my worst (although I regret it most). In HS a girl invited me over to her empty house; I suggested my house, complete with parents downstairs instead. I did manage my first kiss, but nothing more....

Stupid stupid stupid.

Anyway, winna's right in 68. (I thought you were too down on him, winna, for BG even to email). But I still say don't suggest romance after weeks of low/no communication. Get back to some comfortable together time. Fortunately, it's a nice time of year for pleasant walks....

Catherine's totally right. I'm not goign to pine for 6 months.

He's not interviewing for fellowships. He's an attending, but he's had conferences to attend.

No matter what happens I do care about him.

Ask him out but understand that, if it doesn't work out, the whole 'friends' thing probably won't work either.

After all, everyone likes to get letters.

I agree with winna. Yes, geeky guys; yes, busy career. But still -- if he's interested, he knows. And all of this hedging is really a Morse code for "Not Interested Enough."

Although I wonder if he's actually having trouble reading his own signals. It's not out of the question -- you're smart, attractive, interesting, the right age, etc. -- and he may think you are great for him on paper. But the heart is not paper, and he's not showing you that he's eager for intimacy.

Even if it's been a year, if he and the former gf were living together and talking about getting married, I wouldn't dismiss the rebound factor. That and an extremely busy schedule could go a long way toward explaining his apparent diffidence, since other signs clearly indicate some interest on his part.

It sounds as though you two get along well enough for you to bring up the subject frankly on one of your datey non-dates. "Look, this is kind of awkward, but..."

On preview, I'm astonished to find that Emerson wins the thread.

Haven't waded through all the comments yet, but I'll throw in a vote for "wait and see."

I was sort of on the other end of this scenario sometime ago -- good friend, clear attraction, me still very much "on the rebound." He raised, and to some extent pushed, the romantic issue. I demurred because I really wasn't ready for a Relationship and felt like plunging into a pre-mature fling would jeopardize any chance of something more meaningful developing down the line.

If the friendship had simply progressed and the romantic issue were just arising now, I suspect it may have had a real chance. As it is, it seems there is too much water under the bridge to try to broach the subject at this point.

So, you know, good things come to those who wait?

He could totally be on the rebound and unsure of what he wants.

96: Maybe a good reason to see other people until he comes around? Waiting for him sounds depressing.

96: He could be any number of things, it's true. But it's been several months already, correct? Only one way to find out! I think you should go for it, but based on my interpretation of your situation, not have your hopes up too much. I just think generally no good comes of too much introspection and analysis in situations like these. And yeah, definitely don't want six months. That's crazy advice.

On the geeky doctor thing. Some MDs are so career-obsessive and socially inept that they're really looking for a life manager, almost a mom, to take care of all that stuff. They can actually be quite passive and dependent with their wives. I don't think that these relationships are necessarily bad at all.

On the other hand, some are so arrogant, rigid and domineering that they're impossible to be with. This guy doesn't sound like that, but he might be obsessive in weird ways. (One woman I know married an MD PhD who put datestamps on everything in the refrigerator and had the refrigerator mapped out in zones the way laboratory refrigerators are: "How many times do I have to tell you that the milk goes in the right hand side of the top shelf!"

Although I wonder if he's actually having trouble reading his own signals.

Oh, we can assume that he is definitely having trouble reading his own signals.

Judging from my own experience, I have no recollection of ever sending a "signal" to a woman, but presumably I must have done so unintentionally at some point.

"He's a bit more awkward around me than around other people. His eyebrow pretty much always flashes when we see eachother--or even if we walk past eachother when it would be inappropriate to stop, but in a large group setting he almost never looks at me directly, but I think that thee are furtive glances."

He could know that you have a huge crush on him, and that makes him nervous.

If he is that passive, just tell him to show up at a church, have the preacher ready and marry him.

Inertia seems to be his mode of operating.

No concrete move in this long means you are a friend at best.

Judging from my own experience, I have no recollection of ever sending a "signal" to a woman, but presumably I must have done so unintentionally at some point.

Yes!

some are so arrogant, rigid and domineering that they're impossible to be with

His specialty sounds like cause for hope. If he were a surgeon, not so much.

Emerson gets it right: BG should take the initiative, put her cards on the table, and be prepared to move on if nothing happens.

The one thing you shouldn't do is let his indecisiveness keep you in limbo.

Also, while putting your cards on the table might wreck your friendship, it sounds like the friendship you have with him now is, to a large extent, predicated on your desire for exploring something more with him. That might not be the sort of friendship that you want to put a lot of effort into maintaining. It sounds cruel, but it's better than waiting for him to make up his mind.

80 etc:
I guess no one likes 6 months.

here's a story:
Seven months out of a serious relationship, a woman who I knew casually and was attracted to asked me out. We had emailed and flirted, but I was basically giving her the same signals John is giving BG. Anyway, we started dating "for real" and soon realized I wasn't really ready for anything serious. We tried to tone it down to friends with benefits but that wasn't really happening. In the end, it just sort of sucked.

Although it's not fair to ask her to wait around, if she had asked me out 6 months later than she did, I think things would have been different.

This is, of couse, no indication of what will happen to BG. Rereading what I've just written, I realize I only have advice for John and not BG. I redact my earlier comment.

I just fear that if you spend too much time waiting around on this, the outcome (or non-outcome) of it will weigh far too heavily on you. It feels like a delicious possibility for a while, but then it starts turning into self-consciousness or hypercriticism of him. ("Is it my body? Is he a jackass? Am I pushy? Does he imagine I'm pushy? Should I do my hair? Fuck him; I did my hair for him!" etc.) What's sad about non-affairs, in which you seem to be dating someone, but without any physical or verbal explicitation of a relationship, is that you think of it as a friendship, but the instant you get tired of waiting for reciprocation, you won't be friends anymore. There will just be resentment.

All the more reason to make, like, one more try, then start dating someone else, as soon as possible.

I am pwned by JM.

Di Kotimy's situation is one where acting forecloses later development, although that wouldn't always be the case, but I think expressing your interest now, in as matter-of-fact a way as possible, is your best bet.

As Red Green says, we're pulling for ya, and of course for him.

AWB is right.

I think it would be very wrong to conclude that the guy is just plain uninterested, if he really is socially inept. (Social ineptness is something I have great knowledge of). The real question would be whether the guy would be good to be with if BG succeeded in getting behind the barrier. Maybe the ineptness is compounded with more negative traits, and really signals a fundamentally solitary (relation-free) nature.

However, my hunch is that if BG doesn't take the initiative, he won't, but that that doesn't necessarily mean that he wouldn't be interested if she did.

Taking the initiative can also work as a way of getting a definite answer and cutting things off so that they don't drag on forever. The same ineptness that keeps someone from making things happen would also keep someone from cutting things off. I think that eiuther way, he's leaving the ball in BGs court.

18 and 84 get it right.

He's said he isn't ready for a relationship. He's not responded to your "embarrassing" email. He's twice brought up the possibility of doing something together "with other people."

He likes you as a friend.

That said: being friends is good. You have to decide what you want. Do you want a friendship? If you want to remain open to the possibility of something developing later, can you handle that without being in agony? If it doesn't develop, will you be miserable for months?

If you want hot monkey sex, move on. If you just genuinely like him and think he's awesome and wouldn't it be nice to date him, settle into the friendship; maybe something'll happen down the road, maybe not. If you want love and marriage and babies and are going to pine forever, then tell him--a good friendship can handle a blip like that (if the answer's no, which at this point I think it would be) and you'll have it out of your system and at least be able to tell yourself you *know* he's not interested when you start saying "but he smiled at me!"

Also what AWB said.

I dunno. Sometimes it's better not to put your cards on the table. Sometimes things need to play out. Some people (myself for awhile) always put their cards on the table. It can be a means of self-protection, same as never putting your cards on the table. If what you really want to do is move on, then it's the best way of accomplishing that.

How many times can I write "cards on the table"?

He may also be totally, tragically in love with not being "able" to date you. This is, IME, far worse than mere lack of interest.

111: "move on" s/b "buy a monkey"

Bostoniangirl:

How do you look in a lifeguard uniform?

Do you like swimming discussions?

Do you find yourself attracted to dark skinned men?

I guess what I'm saying is, don't do the speech thing. Ask him out as one last shot, or don't, find someone else for the HMS for awhile.

He is kind of geeky and may just be clueless. He totally didn't pick up on the fact that a company called Pr/ide Mort/gages, based in Providence no less, had gay roots.

I was super-confused until I realized that BG meant Provincetown. Providence is the home of Italians, Cthulhu, and Fort Thunder noise-rock bands.

I think it's equally plausible that "he's just not that into you" or that he knows he can't commit the time he thinks a relationship needs and so doesn't want to string you along and then abandon you all the time.

will, as a divorce lawyer, is, I think, the voice of experience.

He is genuinely quite modest about his own significant accomplishments.

He couldn't remember who Rawls was but seemed to think that that was the right sort of political theory. I told him that I knew someone who took a class from Rawls in which Rawls' work was never read or discussed. John seemed to think that that was probably just modesty.

He's super impressed by the fact that my degree is in Clas/sics, and he's a little bit in awe of my memory. I keep trying to explain that I'm not as smart as he thinks I am; it's just that I have a good memory.

When quizzing me about what I'm really passionate about, he did ask me if I wanted a family. I had said that I thought medicine was really fascinating and that it was really cool how one could be a practicing physician and an academic. Lawyers don't get to be staff at academic legal centers. He was sure that I could be a doctor if I wanted to and then he asked me what I was really passionate about: do I want to solve the problem of hunger in the Sudan or to have a family. I had said that Keynes was my intellectual hero but that I'm not about to invent an entire discipline, and he was pretty sure that I could over the next 50 years.

He also told me some stuff about the politics at the hospital that was a lot more emotionally intimate than
a typical first date is.

118: Yes, that was a bit of a brain fart.

I think there could be a lot of truth to AWB's 114. It's very easy to use some argument agout why dating someone is "not a good idea" (for some practical reason) to stop yourself from taking any risks. You get to just assume that she would be interested and that things would be great without the jarring possibilities of reality.

AWB, could you elaborate on what you meant in 114? This is a phenomenon I'm not familiar with. Can you give examples?

Also, I stupidly--cause I was tipsy--said something about having been depressed once, and he was super kind about it. He said, "Oh that's like the common cold. If you haven't been on at least one course of zoloft or paroxetine, you haven't led a full life."

Lawyers don't get to be staff at academic legal centers

Actually, many law schools have clinical faculty who do actual work and teach (usually, their teaching is having students help them on their cases and the attendant instruction).

On the larger point, I say go for it just so you can get out of worrying "is he into me romantically?!" You can just let him answer that question for you. I say try to get him out with you for dinner or drinks one more time, then, either make a move during the encounter, or afterward, send an email conveying your romantic interest and asking whether he reciprocates. My instinct is the "he's not that into you" one, but it really helps to get it out of your system. I'm numbering at least three male friends now that I've confessed my un-reciprocated romantic interest in, and am still great friends with all three. Although if my current state is any indication, having a male friend confess their romantic interest in you is a smashing success.

"Also, I stupidly--cause I was tipsy--said something about having been depressed once, and he was super kind about it. He said, "Oh that's like the common cold. If you haven't been on at least one course of zoloft or paroxetine, you haven't led a full life.""

Absolutely. I'd much rather date someone who has or is taking zoloft, prozac, or one of the other medicines.

If you havent, you will.

The question isnt whether you are on such medication, but whether you are taking your pills like you are supposed to take them.

Better living through chemistry.

But still -- if he's interested, he knows. And all of this hedging is really a Morse code for "Not Interested Enough."

Not necessarily. There have been people I haven't thought about "in that way" until they made a move. And then once they made a move realized, hey, I might like to date this person.

Geeky guys really are a different species. We know they hardly ever pick up on signals, but what I think is possbily even more important is the fact (for 'fact' substitute 'my theory') that when they like someone they are probably more likely to move away from that person than towards them. There's a huge fear factor for geeky guys, one version of which is: 'I like her; she's being nice to me; but she's way hotter than me, so she's only being nice to me; if I hit on her (if I even knew how) it would end in tears, with me feeling like the kid who wets himself in third grade homeroom and gets mocked until the day highschool ends.' I don't exaggerate when I say that there are plenty of guys out there who could have the woman of their dreams strip buck naked in front of them and offer to suck them off, and who would still sit there in paralysed fear.

So my two cents' worth is that when trying to figure out the geeks, the normal guidebook doesn't apply - you really can't judge what they are feeling by observing their behaviour. So I'd go for it, one way or another, 'cause that's the only way you stand a chance of getting what you want out of this.

127: Hear, Hear!

re 127: Reuben speaks the truth.

127: I submit that this advice is to be taken with a grain of salt, as there is probably a certain amount of projection going on.

128 and 129 get it right.

Until the age of 20 or so I generally only asked out girls who I was completely unattracted to, on the theory that if I thought the girls I was attracted to would like me, I was living in a dream world. It wasn't until I assumed a position of authority that my confidence increased slightly.

We're all projecting, but saying it could have been, and has been us.

82 men s/b people

"It wasn't until I assumed a position of authority that my confidence increased slightly."

"Miss, may I see your license, registration, and would you like to go out with me?

Fine, maybe geeky guys need to be a bit more coddled and prodded, but, man, if that's the case, who wants to date them?

B., I think that you have your own axe to grind.

127, eek. The dating difficulties "geeks" have often come from introversion, which is a totally different species of difficulty than the agony described in 127.

135: They tend to be pretty loyal, and they tend to like intelligent women.

While we're telling oblivious-dating-stories, I will note that on several occasions I have bravely invited the object of my affections to an event while indicating that there will be others around solely so that if the object of my affection is not in fact into me he/she will not be embarassed by realizing that I am into him/her. I often send confusing signals because I simultaneously conceal as much romantic interest as I possibly can and also act sort of interested. And for a female person I'm about as much like a geeky guy as possible. So there's that.

Also, BG, aren't you in your mid-twenties? And he's thirty-six? Speaking as someone in her early thirties, not only would I be very dubious myself about dating someone in their mid-twenties (which is I think often but by no means always a reasonable position to take) but I would not believe that he/she was interested unless he/she actually spelled it out in words of one syllable, because I am ooooolddddd.

Frowner, I look like I'm in my mid-twenties, but I'm 31. He's sort of boyish looking and doesn't look 36.

136: ATM.

I'm not exactly an expert on this, but I think you should make some kind of move--it definitely seems possible that he's interested but is having trouble making an approach. You might want to spend a bit more time with him (like JRoth said in 89) and then do a date-date.

Geek or no geek, I think it all comes down to this:

He also said that someone from the hospital had invited him out a while ago and that it was just too soon. Then he said either "I just wasn't ready" or "I'm just not ready." I don't remember which.

He's not ready. He may or may not be interested, but do you want to be his rebound girl?

I agree with the six months thing, but only if you think it won't drive you crazy. Let him work his shit out and try again later if you're both available. He's in your church, you have mutual friends, and he just bought an apartment, so it's not like he's going anywhere.

If it would drive you crazy and you can't set this aside until things are resolved one way or another, ask him out, and make it explicit you're talking about a DATE date, not a hanging-out thing. It sounds to me like you've already asked him out on several dates, and he's either not gotten it or deliberately put buffers between you and him. I'm thinking buffers, but if you have to know, you have to know.

Since when is "loyal" something that's used as a descriptor?
Most of the time I hear that word used it's to describe the advantage of dogs over cats- and who wants a pet for a boyfriend? I've seen guys self-describe as loyal in online ads, and wow, did it seem creepy.

Liking smart women, I'll give you. But (again thinking of online ads) also kind of creepy if used to describe oneself. It's one of those things you show by actions, not words.

123: (Sorry, I was on the train. Back now.)

I've had at least three situations in my life when I have been absolutely sure, beyond all doubt, that a man in my life was totally, completely, desperately in love with me. My instinct in that situation is to make it obvious that I'm available and physically interested, and wait for at least a bit of physical reciprocation before making a real move. In these three situations, my attempts to make my interest known resulted in the man staring deeply and despairingly into my eyes, moving imperceptibly toward me for a solid silent minute, and then pulling back, sighing, and making some sad little joke.

WTF? The first time this happened to me, it was a boy in college who had been a close friend for a long time, pulling this shit on a regular basis. I gave up waiting and started dating another guy. When the first guy realized my relationship was pretty serious, he challenged my bf to a fight, claiming that he loved me first, etc. It was stupid. I'd given him a thousand opportunities to make a move, made it absolutely plain that I was interested, and he couldn't do a thing. He liked the tragedy of feeling like he couldn't have me (in his situation, a dumb "but this friendship! what if I ruin it!") thing) more than the possibility of actually dating me.

The second time it happened, it was someone I worked with during a summer. He was, in fact, my boss, so there would have been some impropriety issues. So after the job was over, I invited him to come visit me, and I visited him. Both times, there were all these stupid quasi-romantic minutes of silence, staring, tragic tearing away, and no HMS. I facilitated as much as I could, but he couldn't get over some sense that it was "wrong."

I am not friends with either of these men anymore, in part because I eventually stopped respecting them.

139: I read a lot of the post the same way, he says 'not that you'll ever meet my mom' not to foreclose all romantic possibilities ever, but because his mental monologue is going 'oh shit you mentioned your mom rule #243 is not to mention your family because then she'll think you're crazy interested and run away because maybe she doesn't want to date me.'

guys out there who could have the woman of their dreams strip buck naked in front of them and offer to suck them off, and who would still sit there in paralysed fear

Such people have not earned the title of "guys".

So, I have or have had several female friends who were into me, who I wanted to keep as friends, but was not at all into. And, basically, my behaviour in those circumstances mimics "John's." I'll try to do things with them, try to bias them towards less datey things, occaisionally go through with something that seems datey when the alternative seems to be "being a jerk," but I definitely avoid follow-up to anything that seems datey. I please kind of weak excuses from time to time to try to signal uninterestedness.

That said, I also have and have had female friends whom I hit on and who shot me down, or who hit on me and whom I shot down. I don't get how it would have to end the friendship to just freaking ask him. Don't make it a big, heartfelt thing. Just say, "Hey, you interested in going on a date some time? If not, cool, friends works." The only reason that you'd have to lose a friendship over this would be if you signalled to him that you would be unable to cope with rejection.

I have no self control, and will be gone again in a moment but:

(1) Sympathetic as I am to the 'geeky guys just won't go after what they want' argument, this really, really, really, really sounds to me like he isn't into you, but is stringing you along out of a combination of being genuinely friendly, feeling too presumptious to send a negative signal when he isn't sure you're interested (that is, waving you off unambiguously would mean assuming that you were pursuing him, and I can see being too shy to make that assumption), and maybe enjoying the attention a little despite being uninterested. Move on, it's his loss.

(2) But maybe I'm wrong. If I am, and the explanation really is that he's too hopelessly geeky to communicate, then anything short of absolute explicitness won't work. So make arrangements for one of the quasi-date-like-things you've been on with him before, and tell him that you're very fond of him and attracted to him and you're looking for a serious relationship with him because you think he's just wonderful; sometimes you think he's looking for the same thing but you aren't sure what he wants. Does he want to be in a relationship with you? If not ever, you can still be friends; if he's not ready for one now, he should call you when he is -- not that you'll be waiting, but who knows, it could happen that you might be available. Sex it up some -- that is, eye contact, touching his hand and so forth - but make the explicit "I'm looking for a relationship" pass.

8 out of 10 you crash and burn, but that's one bad evening, and it settles it regardless of how bad his communications skills are.

(And now I'm back to this mess of briefing.)

135 has it right, as do 143 and 146. Fucksake, really [you can read an exasperated sigh in here].

Since when is "loyal" something that's used as a descriptor?

It is an adjective, hence the descriptorificalty. And it's creepy when used to describe oneself because it sounds needy or 'that last whore didn't realize how loyal i was to her!' But most adjectives used to describe oneself in personal ads sound sort of creepy ("honest", "trustworthy", "good with kids", "tolerant", "intellegent") so I'm not sure that's a good standard.

Geeky Episcopalian: probably not a player and low drama.

139 is exactly right about how the seeing you around other people thing could be consistent with interest. Maybe he's just not interested or maybe he's very interested but can't make a move. You won't know unless you make the move yourself.

Loyal is a perfectly good descriptor for people. It is a virtue, and with good reason. You want your friends and partners to be the sort of people that will stand by you when you hit hard times, rather than running off to be with someone who is less of a downer.

"good with kids"

"I love kids. I mean really love them. Deeply."

This guy sounds like an Asperger's case.

nattarGcM, Just leave the damn thread already, then.

136: A lot of 'em, but in this case a lot of people agree with me, and I'm just trying to point out that encouraging someone to be hung up on someone who looks disinterested isn't helpful.

Also, I keep thinking of téo, who has been pining after a friend and trying to decide whether to ask her out and keeps stalling. Sometimes men are dumb. Sometimes women see signs that aren't there. Either way, this business of waiting for men to get a clue is just no fun at all.

this business of waiting for men to get a clue is just no fun at all.

Agreed. Which is why women need to bite the bullet, same as we want men to.

157: Which is why it's a good thing for women to be willing to make the first move. It doubles the chance that two hopelessly geeky people will actually manage to get naked.

I'm just trying to point out that encouraging someone to be hung up on someone who looks disinterested isn't helpful.

I think everyone agrees on this, obviously. The question is, is he interested. It is not clear to me that he is not; indedd I would say from the facts presented that he is. That is really what we are talking about, what to do when you think he might be interested, but are not sure.

The slightly embarrassing e-mail wasn't that embarrassing, but it didn't include any kind of question in it that could require a response from him. Basically, I answered his question about what my Easter plans were and mentioned that a creepy 75 year-old at work had addressed me by saying "Miss, do you have a boyfriend?"

BG, you're getting pretty consistent advice. Don't just wait around pining and guessing, it's silly. He probably isn't that into you, but he might be, it's hard to be sure at this point. So just ask him out clearly and unambiguously, and see what he says.

I'd have never guessed you were 31.

You might also have to just haul off and kiss him.

I think that BG is in a situation where, even though she's the girl, she's got to take the initiative and make things happen or not happen. IE, she can only be sure whether the guy is interested or not if she presses the issue, because for whatever reason he doesn't seem to be able to do so. (Knowing what I do about entry-level on-call MDs, though, people hereare wrong thinking that he's been making excuses all along. Their schedules are really hellish.)

In these three situations, my attempts to make my interest known resulted in the man staring deeply and despairingly into my eyes, moving imperceptibly toward me for a solid silent minute, and then pulling back, sighing, and making some sad little joke.

Getting shot down is painful, isn't it? Traditionally it was guys who laid their heads on the chopping block. Now occasionally women get chopped, and they don't seem to like it either. Funny thing. Life is suffering.

I am willing to grant that women (not all of them) probably learn to be tactful shooting guys down, whereas guys often don't.

Isn't it kind of weird discussing having a Relationship before you've even smooched? I'm usually not this starry-eyed, but pick a moment, and kiss the fool. It's a cute moment and helpful for figuring out if he's into you, and much less painful than an awkward conversation about a Relationship.

Pwned by DaveL.

158 and 159 implicit in 157.

156: No, you were badmouthing what someone else said. in 127. Pot kettle.

163 is a much better idea than saying, "John, I really value our friendship, and I don't want to do anything to jeopardize that friendship, but I really want to be more than friends." See also 165.

The problem is not an issue of whether he is interested or not, I don't think. This seems like a situation in which we can assume there is some kind of interest there, of some kind. But would this kind of interest make BG happy? If she initiates something, even if he goes along with it, will a relationship ensue in which BG has to do absolutely everything all the time? Basically, at the bottom of it, when does pity for his "interest" turn into resentment?

I get that B wants women to step up in the ways they expect men to, but it is really bad for either party to make all the moves. It's bad for getting relationships started, it's a bad precedent to set in a relationship, and it gives the seducee every advantage to take, either at the start or at the end. I am an extremely forward girl, but even I know there are limits to how much I can do in trying to get it on, without some reciprocation.

I am willing to grant that women (not all of them) probably learn to be tactful shooting guys down, whereas guys often don't.

Possibly an upside for us: the tactful no can be excruciatingly humiliating, whereas the tactless no, after a moment of sting, makes it that much easier to decide the jerk wasn't worth it anyway.

re: 155

I'm not trying to be mean to your particular guy, honestly. And I don't mean to offend your personally, but if you throw a question out to the Mineshaft, you are going to get people who are going to have things to say that aren't going to reflect well on one or more of the 'subjects' of the Ask the Mineshaft question.

I do think these kinds of situations are kind of dorky and not in an endearing good way. I've expressed that view pretty consistently on 'dating culture' threads -- it's nothing personal to you or your situation.

Anyway, I'll leave it.

I think what I was getting at was that the suggestion that geeks tend to be more loyal than (by implication) non-geeks is a little icky.

113 + 114 = enlightenment!

It's all so clear now. Either (A) You put the "hot monkey sex" card on the table, having a pretty clear sense that it ain't going to happen, and then when the other party flees, you tell yourself s/he was just too seriously in love with fabulous you for the hot monkey sex; or, on the flip side, (B) You shoot down the hot monkey sex card, rationalizing that you just don't want to ruin the chances of True Love, when really you would rather just fantasize about unrequited love than take a chance on what you secretly fear may very well turn out to be lukewarm sloth sex.

It never occurred to me that people might put the cards on the table merely as a means of moving on or that people turn down the cards because there's some thrill in keeping the impossible dream impossible.

Suddenly, it all makes sense to me. Or, rather, Emerson's no relationship policy suddenly makes sense to me.

172: You're just oppressing us all with your earthy workingclass sexuality, aren't you.

Getting shot down is painful, isn't it?

Vindictive much, Emerson? I was not shot down. The guys I'm talking about didn't even have the guts to reject me. They just preferred pining to getting it on.

No one is ever going to be cool enough in his or her romantic life to satisfy the universe of all possible commenters.

Go away, LB.

175: GO! A! WAY!

Vindictive much, Emerson?

Enh, I read Emerson's comment as an expression of sympathy with the human condition, not "the shoe's on the other foot now!"

177: Except me, of course.

Subject to correction, I'd speculate that maybe what BG is looking for is different from what JM, B, and AWB are looking for, so that maybe their gut reactions won't work for here. I'd also say that loyalty is a good thing to look for if marriage is in question.

Several of the more-or-less happy permanent relationships I've know of were between individuals who were inept at the dating game and more or less bypassed it.

I think what I was getting at was that the suggestion that geeks tend to be more loyal than (by implication) non-geeks is a little icky.

IME, geeks are far less loyal.

hi BG

i too think you need to do something decisive about this to give yourself an answer as to what's going on.

he's probably not interested, because you've already done some pretty ballsy things (asking him out to the formal thing, asking him to date-y things). but it's worth giving a shot.

HOWEVER. i strongly encourage making a move, not making a speech. so much easier to do, to disentangle from, to recover from and laugh off.

it also doesn't have to be a kiss, if you can't manage that. things i have done in the past: taking someone's arm while we are walking, leaning into them, and saving the best for last: inviting them up to my place after doing something together. that one works VERY well, both because it's a very clear (yet non-embarassing) sign, AND because it still lets the guy make what will technically be the first move, so they feel unpressured & active in the situation.

i will surely get booed on the thread for saying this, but IME, hardwon E: men always say they would like it if women would make the first move, but the vast majority don't actually like it in practice. it's the groucho marx not wanting to belong in any club that will have you effect. so give them enough room so that they do part of the move-making too.

re: 175

My life is like a DH Lawrence novel, I'll have you know. I have aristocratic hotties in period ball-gowns lining up to be ravished outside my greenhouse.

[Anyway, maybe I was sounding a bit nastily judgemental]

men always say they would like it if women would make the first move, but the vast majority don't actually like it in practice

Yes, mmf! This, absolutely.

170: I've been operating under the assumption that BG knows what's good for her, and how much effort she's willing to put in, and will break up if it isn't what she needs.

And also whether pre-dating too-shy-to-make-a-move behavior translates into BG-making-all-the-plans-and-decisions is something that's very hard to judge.

My dad and mom worked in the same office, and he asked her out for drinks a couple times. Then nothing. One day, she corners him -- "so, when are you taking me out to dinner?" she says. Was he uninterested? No, just Catholic. On their first date, his car breaks, she has to call her parents for a ride home while his brother comes to get him.

30 years later and the only constant is that their cars still always break. You can't figure out where relationships are going from how they start.

176: Seriously, AWB, what you described was exactly the nightmare scenario that guys dread. You took the initiative, and found out that these guys weren't really interested. You did what guys are supposed to do, and suffered the humiliation that guys suffer.

Well, except those aspects of us that exist only in comment threads. Commenters at conservative and libertarian sites are all scuba-diving ex-Special Forces veterans and successful entrepreneurs; commenters in dating threads all seem to be bold, brassy and beautiful, with suitors/pining damsels at every door and window. We brush 'em off the windshield on the way to work, kindly but leaving no doubt that we can do better than some geek who likes us.

180: I read Emerson's comment as an expression of sympathy with the human condition

Why on Earth would you do such a thing?

188: I guess I forgot to be humiliated.

191: You sure as shit seem angry or contemptuous.

will a relationship ensue in which BG has to do absolutely everything all the time

This is a good question, but very different from what I had thought was at issue. Yes, if BG is considering a relationship with someone who is so passive that she always will have to do everything emotionally, that is a big issue. However, I am not sure (and yes, I am projecting here), that geekiness as described above means complete passivity so much as afraid of making the first move for a variety of reasons. I think I, and many other geeks I can think of, can be fairly ardent once sufficient encouragement is given.

170: Sometimes it's just a matter of flipping the switch from "off" to "on" and after that the person is perfectly capable of reciprocating, initiating, etc. Or so I've heard.

It's not as though I have a ton of eligible guys beating down my doorstep.

I think that's the point that Flippanter was making, but I'm not sure.

192: Contemptuous, yes, especially in the case of the guy who then tried to fight my boyfriend over love of me. The fact that he was only willing to express desire to someone else, behind my back, when it was no longer an option, seemed both cowardly and wrongheaded.

185's parenthetical: As a guy with an immediate instinct of "Run Away, BG!" and who was quite pleased to see the first responses all confirm my intuition, but was thereafter dismayed, it seems clear to me that any exasperation of yours was on behalf of BG and her interests.

195: The point was to criticize the "grow a pair!" tone of many of the earlier comments admonishing you for wasting your time on somebody you like, certainly not to suggest that you aren't or couldn't be attractive to others.

any exasperation of yours was on behalf of BG and her interests.

Well, yes, of course. But maybe it came off a bit harsh.

196: AWB, guys have to deal with that now and then too -- women running hot and cold, or playing one guy off against another. The guy sounds like he didn't have his trip together and he may be a total mess. I'm only saying that whoever it is who has to take the initiative has to deal with these things.

200: Dude, let it go.

139 is entirely plausible; I have similar experience.

I haven't read this whole thread, but I just wanted to throw out there for the populations' general edification that I'm more and more thinking this "he's just not that into you" business (in general, not in this case) as an all purpose explanation for ambiguous male communication is terrible. I'm racking up a slough (slew?) of examples at this point of situations where it hasn't really been true. In general, if your interested in someone and are confused about their signals, I think you should just pursue (this might not hold true for friendships turning into relationships). Maybe they're busy; maybe they don't know how much they're into you but will be more into you once your efforts get them further exposed to your wonderfulness; maybe they have some misapprehension about you that will be corrected with further contact. Just last Saturday I was out with a guy who seemed definitely interested on the date, then I (concerned that I had inadvertently given a negative signal) made sure to undo it quickly by inviting him to dye some eggs on Monday, which he declined (as I expected him to, I just wanted him to know I was open), but said he'd had a good time, but didn't suggest another activity, and didn't write back to my email when I told him I couldn't go egg dyeing after all. After three days this was really seeming like rejection to me, but then I didn't know why he would write me back saying he had a good time rather than thanks but no thanks. So today I asked him out on another date this weekend, and he said he'd love to, but he's entertaining a friend this weekend, and (admittedly vaguely) suggests next week. Now, it definitely sounds like he's not falling all over himself over me, but it was one date, and maybe he's got other lady friends, or whatever, but as long as he's not my central focus that's a fine way for him to feel, and I can approach things the same way and see what happens. As it is anyway I didn't feel a huge spark but he is so perfect on paper I feel like I should be open. My point is his confusing signals turned out to resolve to at least some degree of interest. According to the SatC line I should have just not made any effort.

201: Why? It's one of the things that's being talked about.

200: Agreed. But the one who takes the initiative doesn't have to be permanently, tragically crushed by it, either. Actually, going through these decisive moments really helped me to distance myself from men who were being manipulative.

"It's not as though I have a ton of eligible guys beating down my doorstep."

Soon grasshopper, soon.

Here are the facts as I see them:

1. You are 31, apparently look younger.
2. Appear to be intelligent.
3. Appear to be interesting.
4. Seemingly not-psychotic.
5. Take medication when necessary.
6. Your eligible single guy pool is about to blossom as all of the fools who married young get divorced.

I think decisive moments are underrated. I think a friendship that can't survive an honest discussion of possiblilities probably wouldn't survive anyway.

203: I agree. If there's nothing else on the table (you aren't ruining a friendship with the object of your desire, or pissing off your buddy who's also into the object of your desire, or something like that), there's no percentage in trying to read coded signals. They're already not dating you -- that's your worst case scenario. You may as well push through the bullshit and get an unambiguous answer.

Love Cala's descripton of her parents. My parents too, worked in the same office. My mother still can't figure out why it was so hard to ask her, why if she'd said no the first time he wouldn't have asked again, but she knows it's true.

206: don't, don't say that as if it is an unambigously good thing. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with dating divorced people. But the pool of recenly divorced contains some really, erm, interesting dates.

Incidentally, did the two guys in the fight described in 144 know each other prior? If so, that story isn't nearly as deranged as it sounds.

" isn't " s/b "may not be"

144: They were in an, erm, fraternity together.

Goddammit. 213 to 211. I suck at numbering things.

213: that was your first mistake

I didn't mean to sound so exasperated. It's just that while I am, by no means a Christian girl (TM), I'm not really into the casual hot-monkey sex either. I think that we're very different in this respect.

(My attempt to do superscript characters didn't show up on preview)

Brock, I know that I don't look 31, but he should know that I'm 31. I once said something about the Boston Lying-In hospital, and he said, "BG, how old are you--if you don't mind my asking?" "I'm 31." I've never heard anyone under the age of 60 call it that." "Well, that's what it was called when I was born there, and ...something about the departments housed in that building."

Also, people, here's the terrible bit. The street that his apartment is on is super nice--the quietest and prettiest street in the Back Bay. He's a little worried that his neighbors might be Republicans, but it's still a lovely place to live. He considered a place on Commonwealth that was next to the Ha/re Krish/nas, because he figured that people who wear funny clothes would be better neighbors than a bunch of Republicans. It turned out that the inspection turned up something wrong with that apartment, and it's probably better for him to live in a place where he can actually sleep.

I'd feel really uncomfortable having him over to my place, because my house is a little weird, is a bit of a dive, and one of my house mates is super creepy. I try to avoid her as much as possible. I haven't moved, because the rent is super cheap.

210: But those guys who married stupidly, while young, emerge so cute and hungry for HMS! I am pro-divorcé.

213: Well, there you go.

I am willing to grant that women (not all of them) probably learn to be tactful shooting guys down, whereas guys often don't.

Possibly an upside for us: the tactful no can be excruciatingly humiliating, whereas the tactless no, after a moment of sting, makes it that much easier to decide the jerk wasn't worth it anyway.

4. Seemingly not-psychotic.

will, the scary bit and reason that I am secretly afraid that nobody will ever really love me enough to marry me is that my Mom has been psychotic. I'm not really worried that I'll be psychotic, but it does put a wrinkle into the equation. My Alter Ego once tried to reassure me that having a crazy family only deterred people who had personal experience of craziness, but I'm not so sure. I wouldn't want someone like my mother as a mother-in-law.

215, 218: a) I was 19. b) I was at a nerd school where the fraternities were even less "cool" than the non-greek population. However, it turns out even nerd-fraternity boys are really awful misogynistic jackasses; they just like to wear the sheepskin of geekdom.

Another thought: so my sister reminds me of BG a bit and some of the advice here, because there's an undercurrent that seems to say getting rejected is the worst thing ever, and that you must be able to see how the entire relationship will play out before you have an actual date. Meaning I've had conversations with my sister where she's worried, pre-cup of-first-date coffee, that the guy she likes won't be a good father because he always watches the Steelers on Sunday and what if they have a kid and the kid has a baseball game will he ignore the kid is football that important to him maybe they shouldn't go out.

And at some point you have to just say, love of little green apples, it's just the first date. You won't know till you get there. This isn't an argument for ignoring warning signs, but just saying, ffs, you can figure out the rest of your relationship after you figure out if you're having one.

217: I guess it really depends what you are after. HMS: no problem. Stable relationship? Low drama? No surprises? In my experience, not so likely.

(My attempt to do superscript characters didn't show up on preview)

Typing ™ will produce ™.

He's a little worried that his neighbors might be Republicans, but it's still a lovely place to live.

I love this.

I really think there's a divide here between people who have had good luck with dating and those who haven't. If the dating scene seems to work for you, you'll probably think that BG's guy is a loser. Sympathy for John seems to come mostly from guys who couldn't handle the dating scene.

It wasn't my ambition 40 years ago to become a spokesman for the dating-inept and relationship-incapable, but I seem to have ended up doing that.

So you're worried about class issues? Or worried about the appearance of class issues?

221: "even" s/b "especially." But even relatively non-misogynistic guys are at high risk of getting territorial when their buddies move on women they've had feelings for, whether or not those feelings have gone anywhere and regardless of whose fault it was that they didn't. In a great many circles it's the sort of thing that would be so not cool.

Way up at 77:

Flirting and friendship: ok, but if you ask him for time and any sort of regular commitment he'll run.

Yeah, it sounds to me like an unstated: no pressure, no pressure, please! kind of situation. He's interested, and is sending signals, but needs to be ephemeral. I spent over a year mutually wooing and becoming progressively closer to a guy like that; it was circumstantial, chiefly for him, and I had to respect it.

I'd give the guy space enough and time. I wouldn't throw down the gauntlet. Except perhaps to simply say that the tone has changed, and you (BG) don't want to lie about that.

"10: But those guys and girls who married stupidly, while young, emerge so cute and hungry for HMS! I am pro-divorcé."

AWB: I fixed your quote.

Bostoniangirl:

Are there people who would want someone like their mother for a mother-in-law? Are there families without gene pool problems?

The people who I think are crazy are the people who think their families are not crazy.

Even Republicans in Boston are Democrats, as even the Democrats in Wyoming are Republicans.

one of my house mates is super creepy

This is the story *I* want to hear.

even nerd-fraternity boys are really awful misogynistic jackasses

McManlyPants and I believe you paint with too broad a brush, ma'am.

168, 182: Feeling cranky today, Emerson? No Relationship Policy beginning to get you down? Need some kittens?

226 gets it right. I've always hated the "dating scene", obviously.

Apo, you were a frat boy?! Wow.

Cranky R Me.

130: I submit that there is no projection, merely empathy and paying attention.

So you're worried about class issues? Or worried about the appearance of class issues?

Counterfly--

235: CO-ED frat. CO-ED. A good synonym for "co-ed frat" could be "club with people in it".

Are there people who would want someone like their mother for a mother-in-law?

It is true that every time I get a creeping desire to imagine what life would be like if I kept a steady boyfriend, I then recall the last time my mom met one. Never again.

"When I say 'psychotic,' I mean it in the DSM, "you *really* need to be on meds" sense."

Bostoniangirl:

When I said crazy families, I meant it in the DSM-IV 'you really need to be on meds' sense."

Oh, right, I remember that now. Some sort of reading club or something. That doesn't count as a fraternity, Apo.

234: Yup. Also maybe worth noting that generalizations based on guys who are in the dating pool may not reflect the male population all that well, since guys who hate it and are bad at it may pass through pretty quickly while the players stick around for years.

238.2: BG, I can say absolutely, certainly, for damn sure that severe craziness in the family is not a barrier to being loved.

BG, honestly, I wouldn't worry too much about the DSM-IV-legitimated psychotic mother-in-law issue. A) Three people in the world get along with their mother-in-law; all the rest are lying. B) Psychotic mother is not something that is an immediate undateable thing; by the time you get to the point where he's worried about interacting with her as 'mother-in-law', you two will be able to deal with that together. Not a worry in the early part of a relationship.

I do kinda thing 188 makes a good point, though. But 226 is still weirdly non-Emersonian; few people are saying he's a loser, they're just saying he doesn't seem interested.

But we all agree that BG should invite him up to her place and/or send him an abashed but unambiguous email.

Damn, I didn't mean to leave the italic tag open.

one of my house mates is super creepy

This is the story *I* want to hear.

The creepy roommate is much more comfortable with cats than people. She thinks that meowing is kind of cute. She's over 40 and has sacrificed a career to her volunteer work for an Episcopal church (not the one I attend)which owns the house I live in. She has very fixed ideas about relationships and gay rights (she's pro), but I don't think she's ever been kissed.

I try to avoid her as much as possible.

Some sort of reading club or something. That doesn't count as a fraternity, Apo.

You are quite mistaken.

Plus I second 244. Dude, my mother is so crazy that she refuses to see a doctor about how crazy she is. Not only am I married, but Mr. B. deals with her a lot better than I do, because she's not his mother.

gay rights (she's pro), but I don't think she's ever been kissed

Too bad you avoid her as much as possible. You could practice your moves on her.

BG is a good Episcopal girl? Even better.

Everyone likes Episcopals. They think (and are probably correct) that they can move us in their direction.

Nobody says "Wow! I could NEVER date an Episcopal."

228: it's not cool because it disrespects the friendship. This is so obvious and irrelevant to misogny. The code, and all. Bros before, uh, prospective partners, and all.

Getting into a fight is pretty stupid, though.

No, I'm worried that I wouldn't like him nearly so much if he didn't have this apartment and that that says something bad about me.

Relax. You're fine.

6. Your eligible single guy pool is about to blossom as all of the fools who married young get divorced.

That's totally a Southern thing. There may be a smallish wave of guys who are coming out of their starter-shackup-unmarriages, but it doesn't sound like there would be a lot of guys like that at her church.

I totally enjoy my M-i-L's company. She's hilarious. Especially after the first one, who I didn't. My mom is very laid back, smart, and pleasant, so not only does Roberta like her, my ex-wife still hangs out with her regularly.

248: Wait, that doesn't make sense. You're neither Eurotrash nor a California bimbo (the local stereotype of that group when I was rushing).

"but it doesn't sound like there would be a lot of guys like that at her church."

She is an Episcopal!!!!!! Do married people even attend Episcopal churches?

249--A few years ago my mother was pretty well convinced that she was flamingly mixed manic and convinced that she was supposed to be at the presidential inauguration. 10 years ago she was pretty well convinced that my grandmother had been murdered by her lawyer and was writing letters to the pope about my father's apostasy. Good times.

251: Have you ever met my super-Catholic mother in law?

"251: Have you ever met my super-Catholic mother in law?"

She doesn't think she could convert an Episcopal? Bring them back to the fold?

255: Which campus? The different chapters are very different.

259: She was upset when her daughter dated one, and cried when the daughter converted. The non-Catholic church wedding made her cry again, I think.

257: My mom was on lithium for 35 years because of stuff like that in her teens and twenties. And my family is the relatively non-crazy (clinically speaking) one. Serious illness, mental and physical (one each), in my wife's family has consumed a largish chunk of our time and emotional energy (and money, for that matter) for the last several years. It's just part of the deal. Adults handle that kind of stuff. If the guy's worth having, your mom is not an issue.

261: I'm so glad my parents were, at their most doctrinaire, just sorta vaguely Christian.

260: MIT, where they refer to themselves as "The No. 6 Club".

The word "crazy" doesn't really work. Sometimes it means "DSM-IV mentally ill", and sometimes it just means "really fucked up and barely functional". I'd say, though, that a DSM-IV mentally ill MiL would be easier to deal with than the second kind, because you're really only required to be kind to them.

My MiL was the worst kind: sane, intelligent, malicious, resentful, and bitter. And she controlled an inheritance.

Ah, I suppose your email address should have given that one away.

250: Dude, she's ugly and wears bad clothes which make her walk around stiffly. I'm thinking of this hideous 60's era plaid vest.

Her newest fashion item are white Reebok sneakers. She thinks that all heels (read: not sneakers) are a male conspiracy to oppress women. Her fashion sense is very strange. It's all very well to say that you don't care about clothes or fashion, but ti's weird to think that really long poorly-fitting skirts make your short, dumpy legs look long and elegant.

Her perception of the world is weirdly distorted. When I shut the door on her in the living room late at night, because I could hear the television and wanted to sleep, she was sure that I was trying to control her.

265: Well jeez, John, if you weren't so greedy that wouldn't have mattered.

I'd say, though, that a DSM-IV mentally ill MiL would be easier to deal with than the second kind, because you're really only required to be kind to them.

This is where we start replaying the Four Yorkshiremen sketch, isn't it?

B, I was out of there after three years, but her poor daughters had to cater to her for 25 years longer. She was the most toxic person I've ever seriously dealt with, on a par with my sociopath brother-in-law who wasn't really part of my own life.

262: Most of my Mom's family is not very adult. My aunt fled to Oregon. My other uncle is in Colorado and communicates mainly through his wife, and the eldest lives in Chelsea (not the fancy place--the city next to Boston) with his dogs. His kids barely speak to him. They all pretty much avoided my Mom for years which meant that they didn't talk to me all that much either. My aunt was pretty angry with her mother for a long time which meant that she had a good relationship with my Internatinal/West Coast cousins but not with me.

270: You're not going to help BG feel less worried about her marriagability with comments like that, John.

267: Shoes with heels *are* a sexist conspiracy.

271: Eh, fuck 'em if they can't take a joke. Whatever's going on relationship-wise, this guy thinks you're a good and substantial person. If he is too, your mom is not an obstacle. And if he isn't, who needs him?

272.1: Wait, "John" is Emerson?

No, as I understand BG's mother does not have and power. My MiL had a lot of leverage and used it cleverly and maliciously to control her daughters.

274: It's his name, you dork.

267: Maybe so, but this is still weird. One day she's clomping up and down the stairs, and I said "Paulette, what are you doing?" "I'm trying to counteract the noise that you make going up and down the stairs." She couldn't just ask me to be a bit quieter, you know. "It's probably, because you wear girl shoes," she said. Girl shoes? I mean, come on.

BG, these crazy-family digressions are good and fine, as long as you understand they really, truly ought to have nothing whatsoever to do with the main topic of this thread. Some of your comments make me worry that you don't understand that. My mother's completely nuts. She's had psychologist after psychologist tell her so, but she refuses to listen. If your mom is truly crazy it probably will drive your significant other batty at times. But he'll also learn to deal with it, and he'll happily do so because he cares about you. And if it weren't that it would be something else. And it certainly, certainly doesn't affect your loveability.

She sounds unpleasant, but heels are kinda loud to walk in on stairs.

I love having a divorce lawyer in relationship threads.

275: Actually, she did once.

Thanks Brock.

The Mineshaft is full of basically decent people. There are a lot of cruel jerks in the world, though, of course, I don't want to marry any of them.

though, of course, I don't want to marry any of them

This cannot be emphasized enough. Being rejected for stupid and shallow reasons is a good thing. It saves you from wasting time on people who aren't worth it.

The Mineshaft is full of basically decent people.

Oops, out of time. Now you have to email him or cockslap him in a public restroom. Thanks for playing.

B, she's gotten in shouting matches over access to keys.

Meowing like a cat is not cute past the age of 8.

The Mineshaft is full of basically decent people.

So you should just pick the commenter here you want to marry/monkey and make the first move, BG.

apo, the New England ones are all married or in serious relationships.

So come on down to NC. We have Episcopal churches and everything.

285: Intriguing. The Mineshaft Dating Service: guarantee to provide either (a) mutually fulfilling couplings; or (b) wildly entertaining comment threads!

If you end up going out with sam k, he and I will have to fight.

284: Perfectly willing to believe roommate is a bad person. Was merely pointing out that hating heels and dressing badly do not a bad person make.

hating heels and dressing badly do not a bad person make

She knows because Ogged is a good person.

I'm wearing heels right now, you bitch.

292: I'm glad you've finally seen the light.

288: What an interesting questionnaire that would make.
1. Are you primarily looking for
(a) a potential life-partner
(b) an excuse to get out of your apartment
(c) HMS
2. What do you think of John Emerson?
(a) cranky nutcase
(b) relatable sceptic
(c) possibly a genius
3. Would you consider dating w-lfs-n?
(a) if he'd quit being SALB
(b) if he's make dinner first
(c) sooo 2005

make s/b making, of course

294: 2, at least, should have a (d) all of the above option.

4. Do you have any history of the following:
a. unexplained rashes
b. cancer
c. mental illness

296 to 297.

252: Yes, exactly my point.

5. Do you think that leading people on is
(a) fun, part of the game!
(b) a lamentable side effect of keeping options open
(c) deserving of a serious beat-down

300!

Ha.

301->80.

"Cranky nutcase" is given. Nowehere to go but up.

"Cranky nutcase" sounds like a euphemism along the lines of "Cleveland steamer" or "rusty trombone."

I am very surprised to discover that both those terms have wikipedia entries.

Late the the thread, and to this kind of question (or early, since my dating conundra are more at the 20/21 y.o. level).

I have to say that I'm totally unimpressed with the guy. On the other hand, it seems clear enough that his signal is 'I'm too tied up with other things right now to spend any serious time getting a relationship going' and this is the best case scenario. Leaving aside the question whether the next 15 years would look pretty much just like the last 5 months -- a distinct possibility, surely -- it seems to me that the real question is where's the fire?

Why not go about life, date/hang with/etc other people, checking in with the Dr. every so often when you see him at church, and wait until he's actually willing to have a friendship that's more than just 'on-call'? Maybe he'll come around, maybe he wont. Asking him on a date now, though, seems most likely to draw a refusal (or worse, an ambiguous pity half-date), and close off the possibilities for the future.

In sum: don't wait, don't pursue. Live with a door open.

"I love having a divorce lawyer in relationship threads."

A lot of people are really prejudice against divorce. But, it really can be a positive in some many ways.

Real Estate always steals the credit from divorce for driving the economy.

297c would disqualify all of us.

300: Do you think that flirting is:
(a) fun
(b) "leading people on"
(c) impossible

"Live with a door open."

Exhibitionist.

"Live with a door open."

Exhibitionist.

Shutin.

A lot of people are really prejudice against divorce. But, it really can be a positive in some many ways.

True! My sister's divorce lawyer is one of her best friends now.

A lot of people are really prejudice against divorce. But, it really can be a positive in some many ways.

Real Estate always steals the credit from divorce for driving the economy.

"can be a positive in some many ways" s/b "pays my salary."

Pays my bills. Pays the bills of many realtors, private investigators, and therapists.

"Real Estate always steals the credit from divorce for driving the economy."

Only because people forget how effective divorce is at forcing real estate transactions. The realtors are nothing without guys like you, Will!

What do think you should do about infidelity?
a) tell
b) not tell
c) I'm not cheating, we have an open marriage!!!!

What's your favorite way to celebrate good news?
a) get drunk
b) get drunk and high
c) get drunk and comment
d) all of the above

Which is correct?
a) Sexist.
b) Racist.
c) Mexican.
d) Persian shoe.

314: Sure, but it makes for a turbulent market for pool-boys.

As a divorcé who just turned the corner from "swinging between gloom and rage" to "seeing a great woman of the HMS religion", I toast will. Although I should be able to get everything done with a summary dissolution--sorry, dude.

284: But meowing isn't crazy if you're interacting with an actual cat, I hope? This meowing woman who doesn't like high heels and fails to wear flattering clothes is causing me some anxiety since I often worry that what I think of as charming eccentricities in myself are in fact viewed by others as repulsive lunacy. (Although I'm reasonably certain that I don't live in Boston, and I know for a fact that I don't wear trainers of any kind, white or otherwise.)

Cala's last question in 316 is a tough one.

"love of little green apples"

this was really very nice.

300:5.(C) continues to scare me.

How do you pwn?
1) Pwn.
2) Weiner-pwn.
3) Kobe!
4) You know, I really don't get why people say 'pwned' just for commenting ahead of someone on comment threads where everyone repeats everything at least three times.

What is the HMS Religion?

319: Cats think you're being condescending when you meow to them. I talk to them as if they were my peers, just lower to the ground. If you want to try to speak their language, blink at them.

324: "What is the HMS Religion?" s/b "When/where are services held?"

What is the HMS Religion?

Ted Haggard's a confessing assemblyman.

324: The Love Boat.

324: The launch platform for God's Exocet.

HMS Religion?
a) Awesome.
b) Only available in Sweden.
c) Perhaps available, but moves to Sweden upon contact
d) Is that the one about duty?

325: But occasionally you can fool kittens if you do a realistic enough meow, and then it's funny.

Hot Monkey Sex!

I'm slow today. Sorry.

"It never occurred to me that people might put the cards on the table merely as a means of moving on."

Really? With all the people who always say "just get your answer"? I'm not saying it's good to lead people on or remain opaque just for the sake of it. I'm just saying that forcing an answer, yes or no, when the guy seems conflicted, is likely to produce a no. Especially if you give a speech or put it in an e-mail. Wait for a better time*, and a real romantic opportunity, and you've got a much better shot.

*I've never been able to do this.

Frowner, she plays with cats. It's the people she meows at when she says hello. Once I shuddered, and then she did say "Meow," just like a cat.

When she's really angry, she sounds normal, but otherwise it's just creepy. Other people have told her that her voice is off-putting, and it is. She is very territorial about her parish and aggressive, but in the rest of her life she's pretty mousey.

333: I guess I don't see what's to be conflicted about. You like someone or you don't. You're ready to date or you aren't. More time isn't going to solve that kind of indecision, right?

They're all about duty.

CharleyCarp's advice is basically sound.

334: I knew a girl who said "Meow" at people all the time in college. She dressed the way you describe and was equally strange, but she was Jewish, not Episcopalian. She got really weird though, started hiding her roommate's mail and stuff.

yayyyyy Matt F got my joke!

Cats?
a) The Parsi do not keep filthy animals around.
b) Don't they break the server?
c) Comity!
d) [meow.] [twitch.] [blink.]

Isn't the whole damn Episcopal Church gay now, anyway? Kind of moots the issue.

Paulette grew up Catholic. She really should have been a nun.

337: Do you really believe that or are you talking yourself out of doing something scary/risky? (Not a rhetorical question.)

Well this guy might be conflicted because he just got out of a relationship and/or is working crazy hours. That does sound lame. Maybe I'm projecting too much here from my own past experiences. Still, I think this "one last shot" gambit should not take the form of a speech or an e-mail. A kiss at the right moment is much better, but harder to pull off.

FWIW, I think I've screwed things up in the past both by calling the cards at a stupid time, and by holding my cards for no good reason. I'm a bad poker player.

333: Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but what I'm getting is "People force an answer because they secretly [subconciously] want to get a 'no.'" I can actually see this -- maybe just a very early variant of the habit of sabotaging relationships for fear of intimacy or what not. It just never occurred to me that, "Hey baby, how's about some HMS?" can sometimes mean "Dear God, please say no, this is my last ditch effort to avoid getting sucked into a relationship with you!"

It is surprisingly explanatory.

My take is that if he has a clue he's flattered by the attention you are giving him. Which implies a latent interest.

But I see three possibilities:
1) He's clueless as to the possibilities at hand. Which would be clueless and a half based on what you've written, but I know plenty of folks who are double clueless.
2) He's not really that into you. But likes you. And is flattered by the attention.
3) He's decided that actually going forward will lead to things he's not prepared for or that will cause you to look at him in a less good way (intimacy issues? intellectually challenging conversations? this could be a real issue that would send you screaming into the night or a figment of his imagination). But in some combination: he likes the attention, he genuinely likes you etc he wants to keep being friends. Sometimes its not you, sometimes its him.

New Mineshaft rules: by comment 100 (was it 91?), the original petitioner must have acted on the advice given up to that point. Subsequent comments must detail ensuing complications, hilarity. Once you go SEK, you never go, um, bek.

So come on, ask him out. We're nearly 250 comments over budget.

Rule 2: No matter what the question, "move to Baton Rouge" is not the answer.

Over at Achewood, Vlad has some useful techniques on display:

Hey, Baby - are you a brontosaurus? Because I just discover a bone in my pants

Also there: "L.B. is so annoyink".

335: The conflict might be that (a) you really like someone, but (b) you're not ready to date. The result is trying to maintain the very delicate balance of preserving interest until the timing works without promoting so much interest that you force the issue. Which could be what John is doing -- signalling, "I am interested, I'm not ready, maybe we can give this a shot in a few months."

DaveL, I don't know. There was really only one line that really struck me: "Why not go about life, date/hang with/etc other people." Advising people to go about life and not pine is generally good advice. I need to get in the game.

344

Yeah, that may be right. I don't think the gambit-takers secretly want a "no" as much as they dread one, and act in order to be put out of their misery. The advice-givers tend to fully expect a "no" and think this is the best thing that can happen for their friend.

For those who aggressively lay the cards out, very early, they may secretly be sabotaging things, yeah.

348: "Let us for one more night spit into the face of death!" Yes. Awesome.

I find myself using the card-playing metaphor a lot recently. Because I decide within about 10 minutes whether someone is doable or not, I just lay everything on the table, just to show my hand. As someone suggested above, this is also a form of cowardice, because it puts all moves in the other person's court.

But it's also shitty because the other person tends to just sit there, looking at his cards and making faces like he *totally* has *all* the same cards, dude! and never playing any of them. It usually turns out he's got a girlfriend or is not into HMS, and didn't want to let me know, bc he likes the attention.

You're ready to date or you aren't. More time isn't going to solve that kind of indecision, right?

Wha? I think time USUALLY solves problems that are caused by being "not ready" to do something.

350: That might very well be the right course of action. On the other hand, picking a time to just kiss him and see what happens might also be the right course of action. Tough call, but I sure as hell wish that I'd tried Plan B a few more times when I was younger. (But then I'm a guy and I'm supposed to.)

354: that is, if the problem will ever be solved, it is the passage of time which turns "not ready" to "ready".

Not-ready tends to stay not-ready for a damn long while, right? I was not-ready after a pretty ugly relationship for about two solid years a while back.

A lot of guys learn in college, or if they are smart, earlier, that laying out their cards early often scares off women, because they assume you are only interested in a casual relationship, etc. The idea might be that if you really had such strong feelings, you couldn't show them so easily. Or that might be completely wrong and screwed up.

I learned this in my mid-twenties. But then I didn't know how to read the cards until just before then. Or maybe I never did.

and didn't want to let me know, bc he likes the attention

Far, far too familiar with this one.

Or that might be completely wrong and screwed up.

No, sounds pretty accurate to me. I show my cards early because I'm not that invested and would like to move on to someone else as soon as I find out this one's taken or not interested.

I think that this is mostly played out. I'm going to see if there's an appropriate moment for me to try to do something, and if there isn't, there isn't.

I'd love to hear teo's thoughts, but he, having esposued the laptop-free lifestyle, is probably far from a computer.

360 -- That strategy makes sense except where there's someone for whom you have a particular interest.

Yeah. I think it's New York getting to me that the idea of having a "crush" lasts about a week.

I've done lots of things I'm not proud of in retrospect because I liked the attention. But I don't think this is only a guy thing.

Keep in mind that in the marraige problem, the people doing the asking get what they want more than the people who do the accepting/rejecting. Also keep in mind that in circumstances like this, "no" is not usually permanent.

Also keep in mind that in circumstances like this, "no" is not usually permanent.

Stay tuned for the next episode, in which this advice turns BG into a date rapist.

It's a shame. Would be cool if one of those long drawn-out things came together in the end, if only for the sake of a good story, but it never happened for me.

366: Both of my long-term relationships including my engagement evolved from more-than-a-year-long friendship-crush-wondering situations. Any relationship with someone I didn't know for a while beforehand has lasted a couple weeks.

I was otherwise occupied. When did we start playing cards?

366: It's all about playing your cards right. Show your hand too soon, you risk forcing a 'no' from soemone 'not ready.' Wait too long, it's really hard to stay in the game. Timing is everything.

I suck at cards.

Well good on you, Cryptic Ned. That's how things should be.

Of course, things going very simply and smoothly, leading up to a serious relationship, also has its advantages.

playing cards

What do you mean? The Friday game is Boticelli, dude.

Oh what am I saying. It's early yet for a Friday game.

Lots of things are really all about timing. Yes, life is timing. Timing and not being a jerk. This comment contains all the useful information I possess. And it reads like a hallmark card. And so, retirement.

374.6: Timing!

375: What's the secret of--what. Fuck, comedy! Timing.

I'm late to the party here, but if BG was feeling really gutsy she could say "I totally want the first real date with you once (your schedule makes it possible / you recover from the trainwreck of your previous relationship*)."

Another possibility that comes to mind is getting the phone number of his mom, and asking her if she's barking up the wrong tree.

* except put that more tactfully, cuz I'm not so good with the tact.

There's one more thing that I should have mentioned a while ago. He's said on several occasions that he's a really risk averse person, so it's entirely possible that he's just afraid of rejection.

378: He's said on several occasions that he's a really risk averse person

In what context? That could be a cry for help.

379: In line at the bank while he fiddled with something in his pocket, why?

378 is very, very consistent with what the stated facts would indicate about his strong interest in a relationship with you if "John" were, ummm, this guy I used to know.

I've been assuming that BG wants a serious relationship, not hot monkey sex, and the thing that sort of worries me about the situation as she's described it here is that he's left her guessing and wondering at his intentions and emotional life. In a serious relationship, that sort of reticence can be a real problem. Maybe it's something he'd get over if given a signal that confiding (emotionally, physically) is welcome, but running after him sounds like it could get exhausting.

I like Charley's advice: do your own thing, date other people, don't wait for him.

382: But emotional reticence outside of a serious relationship seems to me to be a poor predictor of what happens inside a serious relationship.

This is a bold leap, but I theorize that people who are thinking in the long term jump slower than people looking for HMS.

Counterintuitive, yeah, but if I'm right I get the Nobel Prize for Relationships.

the thing that sort of worries me about the situation as she's described it here is that he's left her guessing and wondering at his intentions and emotional life.

I suppose, but hasn't she done the same? People generally tend to overestimate how transparent their own intentions are. It seems entirely possible to me that BG and John are doing a dance of reticence, both equally hesitant to make a further move because they're equally unsure of how it would go over.

Obviously John's horrid doctor schedule is a complicating factor, but it's also one that might understandably make him more cautious. Isn't it relatively reasonable to assume that being as busy as that would make you an unappealing romantic prospect, absent super clear signals to the contrary?

384: Damnit, Emerson, say something outrageous before we start feeling all affectionate and shit.

Another possibility that comes to mind is getting the phone number of his mom, and asking her if she's barking up the wrong tree.

This is the best advice in the thread. Please do it and report back to us.

It is very hard for me to read HMS and not think Harvard Medical School.

I think "Her Majesty's Ship."

383, 384.---Ack, you're probably right. The fuck do I know? Good luck, BG.

HMS is a British seafaring vessel stocked with young doctors-to-be who all fuck each other all the time.

Yes, I was kind of wondering whether med school is full of sex-crazed fiends getting it on.

I'm not really retiring yet, because I just thought of the following: If life is about timing, then for much of my life, I was the Rex Grossman of intimate relationships. Learn from my mistakes, BG! Don't force that pass into triple coverage!

"Veritas" is just Latin for "rum, sodomy, and the lash."

I used to go regularly to the student health center at the hospital / med school where I worked, and in fact they had a jar of free condoms on the counter, right above the drug-alcohol counseling notice.

Wrongshore:
I love a happy divorce without lots of fighting.

"Advising people to go about life and not pine is generally good advice. I need to get in the game."

No this is actually terrible advice, because "don't pine" is impossible to follow, unless it is paired up with "kiss him to find out how he really feels" or "move to another state"

387: I really hope that was sarcastic.

Yeah, my humor can be pretty dry, but Brock's is so dry that sometimes it's really hard to tell, especially since he actually claims to mean some of the stuff that I take to be dry humor. Maybe emoticons have to be unbanned just for Brock?

Hi everybody!

teo! need some advice?

it's advice-giving day again.

My wallaby won't start in cold weather.

401: I'm okay for now, thanks. Maybe in a little bit.

403: Try putting in some new antifreeze.

Standpipe, how many times do I have to tell you to discard that dead wallaby? Hot weather, cold weather, it's always the same story.

C'mon, teo. Ask us whether you ought to carry an umbrella tomorrow.

I don't think I'll be needing an umbrella tomorrow. The weather's supposed to be beautiful.

404 -- I have limited experience with wallabees; but I can't really see how anti-freeze would fix a broken one. But you're the expert I guess.

As to whether I have some sort of moral obligation to carry one, well, that's a different matter, though I admit one that doesn't concern me all that much.

Can I have some advice then?

Standpipe's wallaby might be full of eels.

408: I didn't say it would fix it...

Psst -- "carry an umbrella" was intended as a euphemism.

And tossed out into a harbor in Danzig somewhere? Scary, Emerson.

Moral obligations concern everyone, teo.

410: Sure, I guess. Any particular subject in mind?

Wallaby and good night.

I was wondering about umbrellas, actually. No, seriously. Alright. Where should I put up all my pictures in this new apartment?

On the walls.

Is "a harbor in Danzig somewhere" a meaningful phrase? My understanding was that "harbor" was a reference to a city, like Gdansk, that has a waterfront with commercial shipping. So there is not "a harbor in Danzig" let alone multiple possible ones; Danzig is the harbor.

I thought of something to ask for advice about, but this thread's getting kind of creaky so I think I'll ask in another one.

419 -- so conventional. 418 -- invite Armsmasher over and subject yourself to his tutelage.

good! This is working. Ok, what shall I have for lunch tomorrow?

He meant "and talked into harbouring Danzig somewhere."

Thai.

(Mexican.)

420 went over my head, must admit. There is such a thing as Boston Harbor, right?

Thai is good! Ok, at what age should I sell my children to the factory?

oh, but now I'm confused.

427: Right away. Otherwise they may start not picking up the phone when you call.

420: 414 was a reference to the supremely unpleasant eel-fishing scene in The Tin Drum, was it not? Except in this case a wallaby stands in for a donkey's (horse's?) head. And Danzig is Gdansk, is it not, Clownæ?

398/399:

(1) Yes, sarcasm.
(2) Well, more like mostly sarcasm. The first sentence was sarcasm. The second sentence was a sincere plea. But I confess it was not a plea made with BG's best interests at heart.
(3) Was it really hard to tell that was sarcasm? I wouldn't even suspect that one was a tough call.
(4) I'm wondering what I've claimed to mean that you've taken to be dry humor. First, because I wonder if it was itself intented to be a humorous claim, one that I took to be obviously sarcastic. Second, because I don't really recall ever claiming to mean anything at all. Quite the contrary, I think I've consistently maintained that I've never really meant anything I've ever said in my life. Not sincerely, anyway. Not even my wedding vows. Certainly nothing I've written in the comments of a blog.

That's what I thought. And I'm JUST READING the Tin Drum. And I JUST READ that scene. So the jig is up, Emerson, get out from under my bed.

430: what did I say to draw into question the identity of Danzig and Gdansk?

431: Certainly nothing I've written in the comments of a blog.

So, you actually think it wouldn't be cruel to tattoo pigs without sedating them, for instance?

Huh?

432 -- Awesome. What a great book -- are you having a good time with it?

434- of course it would be cruel. I didn't really mean it when I said that I've never really meant anything I've ever said in my life. Not sincerely, anyway.

434- of course it would be cruel. I didn't really mean it when I said that I've never really meant anything I've ever said in my life. Not sincerely, anyway.

I likes it.

438 is entirely the fault of blog breakdown; I bear no blame, and accept no responsibility.

440: So you did mean what you said when you said you didn't mean anything you said? Is that what you're saying?

I think that this is mostly played out. I'm going to see if there's an appropriate moment for me to try to do something, and if there isn't, there isn't.

I don't know that I can add anything, and I'm probably the last person to give advice in these matters, and the thread has indeed moved on, but one thing you might want to consider is how you'll approach things should you keep the friendship as it is (while wanting more) if you meet someone else who's interested in you in the meantime. If you think that your feelings for John will make it difficult to find yourself interested in someone else, then you might want to resolve them sooner rather than later. If not - and maybe I'm the only one who's had strong feelings for one friend blind me to what I later realized were the signs of a different friend's growing interest in me - then ignore what I just said.

Also: about him not being ready for a relationship - it's possible for friends to talk about this without talking about their particular feelings for each other, right? The next time you see him, you could try to find out - generally speaking - whether or not he thinks he's ready. If he is, offer to set him up with someone who turns out to be you. (Or maybe that's too convoluted approach; I've always wondered about people doing that, though, probably based on some story I heard or read.)

No, I accept responsibilty for 437, just not 438. Try to keep up.

433: My understanding was that "harbor" was a reference to a city, like Gdansk, that has a waterfront with commercial shipping. So there is not "a harbor in Danzig" let alone multiple possible ones; Danzig is the harbor.

This. When I first read it, it sounded as though you were making some distinction between city "Gdansk" and harbor "Danzig," which confused me because Gdansk/Danzig is not the harbor, it's a city that has a harbor. But all is now clear.

So you didn't mean what you said about not meaning anything you say in 438, but you do mean what you said about not meaning what you say when you said you didn't mean that you don't mean anything you say in 437. Got it.

Oh, and to continue being way late to this thread, I'll add that BG's housemate sounds like she could have been a character in The Bostonians.

It's taken me damn near 6 months to read this - your move BG

The association of ships with HMS reminded me of the signal flags thing again.

I would go for the straightforward. "Would you like to go on a date, John?" At least then you'll know. I know people who are still friends with people who turned them down. It happens. You don't have to go off and join the Foreign Legion or go shooting tigers in India or something.