Strange game?
October 29, 2008 8:13 AM Subscribe
Please help a dating novice understand this guy's weird behaviour.
I met this guy (we're both in our mid-twenties) through a friend of a friend at a bar and we talk, get to know each other a bit, get kind of flirty and before the bar closes he asks for my number and I ask for his (he, at one point, when asked by my friend, said I was 'cool' and 'hot' so there was at least some attraction there). When I got home that evening, real late, I text him saying I enjoyed talking to him, that I think he's cute and to give me a call sometime (I wanted to let him know that I was genuinely interested). He responds by saying he had fun, we should hang out again sometime and that he'll call me. The next day during my lunch break I replied, 'sounds good,' and I asked what his last name was, because I felt weird not knowing it.
Later on that day or so (this is yesterday), apparently he told his friend that he had punched in the wrong number (my number) when we were at the bar and so he wanted to know if I had his. The friend passed that message to my cousin's friend, after which my cousin told me. Needless to say, I was confused because surely he'd know that I had his number as I had texted him, and I would assume he had mine as he replied back. But it's possible he could have lost it somehow. In any case, I would think he'd at least know that I had his number as I initiated the contact (and he knew it was I who had texted him because he addressed me by name).
This is just weird. My cousin's friend (who passed the message to her) thinks that this is his way of getting me to call him as he's shy, but I can't help but interpret this as his way of letting me know that he's not interested.
I don't have too much experience in the realm of dating so I'm not really sure how to interpret this or how to proceed. Hivemind?
I met this guy (we're both in our mid-twenties) through a friend of a friend at a bar and we talk, get to know each other a bit, get kind of flirty and before the bar closes he asks for my number and I ask for his (he, at one point, when asked by my friend, said I was 'cool' and 'hot' so there was at least some attraction there). When I got home that evening, real late, I text him saying I enjoyed talking to him, that I think he's cute and to give me a call sometime (I wanted to let him know that I was genuinely interested). He responds by saying he had fun, we should hang out again sometime and that he'll call me. The next day during my lunch break I replied, 'sounds good,' and I asked what his last name was, because I felt weird not knowing it.
Later on that day or so (this is yesterday), apparently he told his friend that he had punched in the wrong number (my number) when we were at the bar and so he wanted to know if I had his. The friend passed that message to my cousin's friend, after which my cousin told me. Needless to say, I was confused because surely he'd know that I had his number as I had texted him, and I would assume he had mine as he replied back. But it's possible he could have lost it somehow. In any case, I would think he'd at least know that I had his number as I initiated the contact (and he knew it was I who had texted him because he addressed me by name).
This is just weird. My cousin's friend (who passed the message to her) thinks that this is his way of getting me to call him as he's shy, but I can't help but interpret this as his way of letting me know that he's not interested.
I don't have too much experience in the realm of dating so I'm not really sure how to interpret this or how to proceed. Hivemind?
Don't read into people. Either get clarity or stop caring.
posted by Laugh_track at 8:22 AM on October 29, 2008 [22 favorites]
posted by Laugh_track at 8:22 AM on October 29, 2008 [22 favorites]
he told his friend that he had punched in the wrong number (my number) when we were at the bar and so he wanted to know if I had his
Why would he bother doing this if he wasn't interested? Seems like complicated gymnastics when he could just say "Uh yea, I'll definitely get around to calling her... sometime..."
posted by 0xFCAF at 8:22 AM on October 29, 2008
Why would he bother doing this if he wasn't interested? Seems like complicated gymnastics when he could just say "Uh yea, I'll definitely get around to calling her... sometime..."
posted by 0xFCAF at 8:22 AM on October 29, 2008
Why didn't he just ask your mutual acquaintance for your number if he lost it? I definitely think this sounds a little weird. That said, people can be boneheads at times, especially with regards to new possible relationships. It's possible he's not interested, but it's also possible that he's just being a dope about realizing that he texted your phone number so he obviously has it somewhere in his phone.
What I would do: In a few days (maybe a week), text him and let him know you'd like to chat about getting together again. Include your phone number in the message text to eliminate the possibility of him being too stupid to figure out your phone number. If he doesn't call you back after that, he's either not interested or too socially awkward to put up with.
posted by tastybrains at 8:23 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
What I would do: In a few days (maybe a week), text him and let him know you'd like to chat about getting together again. Include your phone number in the message text to eliminate the possibility of him being too stupid to figure out your phone number. If he doesn't call you back after that, he's either not interested or too socially awkward to put up with.
posted by tastybrains at 8:23 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
It sounds someone got some information wrong when everyone was playing the telephone game with his message to you.
He sounds genuinely interested, but it could go either way... I would think up a reason to give him a casual text to force a response from him and see where it goes from there. Give him a few days before losing hope!
posted by Willie0248 at 8:25 AM on October 29, 2008
He sounds genuinely interested, but it could go either way... I would think up a reason to give him a casual text to force a response from him and see where it goes from there. Give him a few days before losing hope!
posted by Willie0248 at 8:25 AM on October 29, 2008
Ask him.
He might be shy, distracted, forgetful, drama queen or the President of Dimension X and you've blown his cover. You're understandably confused about his actions, and you have a method of contacting him, so ask him.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:26 AM on October 29, 2008 [5 favorites]
He might be shy, distracted, forgetful, drama queen or the President of Dimension X and you've blown his cover. You're understandably confused about his actions, and you have a method of contacting him, so ask him.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:26 AM on October 29, 2008 [5 favorites]
Sensible advice from tastybrains. Bear in mind this is a message apparently told to his friend, who told your cousin's friend, who told your cousin, who told you. Plenty of scope for it to get garbled.
posted by Phanx at 8:30 AM on October 29, 2008
posted by Phanx at 8:30 AM on October 29, 2008
I would send a text message saying "Hey why no call" (throw in a ":(" for good measure. This takes care of the possibility that he lost his phone or dropped it in a toilet. Also if he is a little shy this might give that last bit of confidence. If he doesn't answer his non reply or lame reply will indicate as much.
posted by syntheticfaith at 8:33 AM on October 29, 2008
posted by syntheticfaith at 8:33 AM on October 29, 2008
Agreeing that the message got messed up on its journey from him to you. But, assuming that the message is as you got it, I would say that he's not into you. Even if he is, this "if I talk to her friends maybe it'll get back around to her and she'll call me, so I don't have to call her" is a round about childish way to get your attention. If he really liked you and had the ability to act like man he would just call you or get your number from some one. My recommendation? Do nothing. He knows you're into him and you did your part making the move. Ball's in his court. If he doesn't follow through, then you know he's not into you. If he does follow through, then you can just chalk all this up to a miscommunication, and go out and have fun.
posted by greta simone at 8:36 AM on October 29, 2008
posted by greta simone at 8:36 AM on October 29, 2008
I would send a text message saying "Hey why no call" (throw in a ":(" for good measure.
Eww, no. That's so lame and weak. Don't be that girl. If you want to talk to him on the phone, CALL HIM.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 8:38 AM on October 29, 2008 [24 favorites]
Eww, no. That's so lame and weak. Don't be that girl. If you want to talk to him on the phone, CALL HIM.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 8:38 AM on October 29, 2008 [24 favorites]
You are reading waaaayyyy too much into this..
But FWIW: On my phone (a modernish Samsung something-or-other) I have no way of saving (or calling) numbers I receive via SMS. So if you texted me, I can reply via text no problem. But for me to call you i would have to write the number down and then punch it in. As you can see, there are plenty of intervening actions (deleting texts, changing phones, writing nunbers down wrong) where I can stuff your number up.. especially after a few beers.
So.... chill.
posted by TheOtherGuy at 8:40 AM on October 29, 2008 [2 favorites]
But FWIW: On my phone (a modernish Samsung something-or-other) I have no way of saving (or calling) numbers I receive via SMS. So if you texted me, I can reply via text no problem. But for me to call you i would have to write the number down and then punch it in. As you can see, there are plenty of intervening actions (deleting texts, changing phones, writing nunbers down wrong) where I can stuff your number up.. especially after a few beers.
So.... chill.
posted by TheOtherGuy at 8:40 AM on October 29, 2008 [2 favorites]
To add to the confusion...
Is it possible some phone users don't know whom the text is from? I've had less-text-savvy folks not be sure who I was when I texted them.
posted by quinoa at 8:47 AM on October 29, 2008
Is it possible some phone users don't know whom the text is from? I've had less-text-savvy folks not be sure who I was when I texted them.
posted by quinoa at 8:47 AM on October 29, 2008
apparently he told his friend that he had punched in the wrong number (my number) when we were at the bar and so he wanted to know if I had his.
plus
I can't help but interpret this as his way of letting me know that he's not interested.
= DOES NOT COMPUTE
I'm also dyslexic with numbers and bad with names, so if someone I met once texts me, I might have no idea who it was the next day, and I wouldn't know how to get their number off of the text msg. Personally it just sounds like he hadn't had enough coffee and said something boneheaded, not realizing that OF COURSE you have his number since you texted. CALL HIM.
posted by desjardins at 8:59 AM on October 29, 2008
plus
I can't help but interpret this as his way of letting me know that he's not interested.
= DOES NOT COMPUTE
I'm also dyslexic with numbers and bad with names, so if someone I met once texts me, I might have no idea who it was the next day, and I wouldn't know how to get their number off of the text msg. Personally it just sounds like he hadn't had enough coffee and said something boneheaded, not realizing that OF COURSE you have his number since you texted. CALL HIM.
posted by desjardins at 8:59 AM on October 29, 2008
This would all make sense if he gave his number out more than once and punched yours in wrong. He may not know what girl texted him to say they had a nice time.
posted by PFL at 9:03 AM on October 29, 2008
posted by PFL at 9:03 AM on October 29, 2008
Call him.
What is the worst that happens?
If he's not interested he'll tell you he's busy.
If I wasn't interested I wouldn't tell your cousin's friend's sistermomma's boyfriend that I didn't have your number....I would just never talk about it.
posted by rocket_johnny at 9:06 AM on October 29, 2008
What is the worst that happens?
If he's not interested he'll tell you he's busy.
If I wasn't interested I wouldn't tell your cousin's friend's sistermomma's boyfriend that I didn't have your number....I would just never talk about it.
posted by rocket_johnny at 9:06 AM on October 29, 2008
But FWIW: On my phone (a modernish Samsung something-or-other) I have no way of saving (or calling) numbers I receive via SMS. So if you texted me, I can reply via text no problem. But for me to call you i would have to write the number down and then punch it in. As you can see, there are plenty of intervening actions (deleting texts, changing phones, writing nunbers down wrong) where I can stuff your number up.. especially after a few beers.
This was my first thought too. I probably have the same phone as The Other Guy.
Regardless, there's been too many iterations to make any sense of what this could "mean." Just call him and ask him out for coffee or let him know what night you'll be at the bar next.
posted by desuetude at 9:25 AM on October 29, 2008
This was my first thought too. I probably have the same phone as The Other Guy.
Regardless, there's been too many iterations to make any sense of what this could "mean." Just call him and ask him out for coffee or let him know what night you'll be at the bar next.
posted by desuetude at 9:25 AM on October 29, 2008
'I would send a text message saying "Hey why no call" (throw in a ":(" for good measure.'
Yes. This sends the right message: You're interested, without seeming too interested, and you're confident enough to re-initiate contact and know that you're worth calling.
Eww, no. That's so lame and weak. Don't be that girl. If you want to talk to him on the phone, CALL HIM.
On the contrary, you're not being "that girl" unless you do call him. A text is far more subtle and you eliminate the chance of saying something awkward or seeming overeager. A text also won't catch him at an inconvenient moment or put him on the spot. He'll have time to think about it and do what he wants to. If you don't hear back from him then, move on.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 9:34 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
Yes. This sends the right message: You're interested, without seeming too interested, and you're confident enough to re-initiate contact and know that you're worth calling.
Eww, no. That's so lame and weak. Don't be that girl. If you want to talk to him on the phone, CALL HIM.
On the contrary, you're not being "that girl" unless you do call him. A text is far more subtle and you eliminate the chance of saying something awkward or seeming overeager. A text also won't catch him at an inconvenient moment or put him on the spot. He'll have time to think about it and do what he wants to. If you don't hear back from him then, move on.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 9:34 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
Sorry, I'm with TPS. Further texting could lead to further confusion.
Worst case? She calls, and he's not interested -- but then she knows.
Best case? She calls and he's like "I'm so glad you called - I don't know how to get the number somebody's texting from!"
And no, guilting text messages. So middle school.
posted by canine epigram at 9:38 AM on October 29, 2008 [2 favorites]
Worst case? She calls, and he's not interested -- but then she knows.
Best case? She calls and he's like "I'm so glad you called - I don't know how to get the number somebody's texting from!"
And no, guilting text messages. So middle school.
posted by canine epigram at 9:38 AM on October 29, 2008 [2 favorites]
I agree with the texting leads to confusion crowd. Seems childish to me.
posted by vincele at 9:44 AM on October 29, 2008
posted by vincele at 9:44 AM on October 29, 2008
Phone technology + playing telephone = confusion. I cannot count how many times I've lost numbers, had my phone destroyed or punk out mid-text/convo, or just not figured out where that number got to (may have saved it to someone else's name, for example). Also, friends, even when they mean well, may get the story wrong. And due to their own issues, they may not actually be helping you.
So now what? Call him using the confusion as an excuse -- hey, I heard you lost my number and there's this band/lecture/bar/thingy I was thinking of checking out. Or, if you're chicken, text him your number using the confusion as an excuse -- I heard you lost my number, here it is. Calling him out on not calling you will likely not be productive -- you don't know what's going on in his life this week.
posted by *s at 9:44 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
So now what? Call him using the confusion as an excuse -- hey, I heard you lost my number and there's this band/lecture/bar/thingy I was thinking of checking out. Or, if you're chicken, text him your number using the confusion as an excuse -- I heard you lost my number, here it is. Calling him out on not calling you will likely not be productive -- you don't know what's going on in his life this week.
posted by *s at 9:44 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
Worst case? She calls, and he's not interested -- but then she knows.
No, it could easily be worse. If she calls and he's having an unpleasant conversation with his boss/landlord/mother/brother/cousin or if he's late for something or otherwise in a hurry, he'll have to let her go abruptly. Then, maybe he's interested, but can't work up the nerve to call back. Meantime, she misinterprets the brusque conversation as a lack of interest. (And the worst case scenario is that he's the reincarnation of Jack the Ripper.)
And no, guilting text messages. So middle school.
I wouldn't interpret that as "guilting", I would interpret it as pleasantly feisty. And just so you know, there were no text messages when I was in middle school.... or high school.... or college.... or graduate school.
Let me wrap this up by saying that I'd interpret a phone call as being chased, and like most living beings, when I'm chased, I run.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 9:49 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
No, it could easily be worse. If she calls and he's having an unpleasant conversation with his boss/landlord/mother/brother/cousin or if he's late for something or otherwise in a hurry, he'll have to let her go abruptly. Then, maybe he's interested, but can't work up the nerve to call back. Meantime, she misinterprets the brusque conversation as a lack of interest. (And the worst case scenario is that he's the reincarnation of Jack the Ripper.)
And no, guilting text messages. So middle school.
I wouldn't interpret that as "guilting", I would interpret it as pleasantly feisty. And just so you know, there were no text messages when I was in middle school.... or high school.... or college.... or graduate school.
Let me wrap this up by saying that I'd interpret a phone call as being chased, and like most living beings, when I'm chased, I run.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 9:49 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
Don't do the whole 'hey, why no call :(' text - he's already explained why he can't call you, the ball is in your court now, give him a call.
posted by missmagenta at 10:01 AM on October 29, 2008
posted by missmagenta at 10:01 AM on October 29, 2008
Texting isn't childish, but I don't think the content of the text should be "fiesty" or anything ... if you text, be direct and give him your phone number within the message's content.
There's nothing wrong with calling, either. If you have to leave a voicemail, just say that you had a great time, you'd love to get together again, and leave your number so he has no excuse to not call you back (unless he's not interested).
Either way, I'd contact him once more and only once more. Pick your favorite medium and go for it. His response (or lack thereof) will let you know if he's interested and worth any more of your time.
posted by tastybrains at 10:03 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
There's nothing wrong with calling, either. If you have to leave a voicemail, just say that you had a great time, you'd love to get together again, and leave your number so he has no excuse to not call you back (unless he's not interested).
Either way, I'd contact him once more and only once more. Pick your favorite medium and go for it. His response (or lack thereof) will let you know if he's interested and worth any more of your time.
posted by tastybrains at 10:03 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
I just called my own cell phone to retrieve my voicemails and was told by Verizon that "the customer you are trying to reach is not connected" or some such shit. What if Mr. Loverboy was trying to call me and he got that message? I'd never know he called, and might interpret it as lack of interest, when it was Verizon's damn fault.
I've also had text messages disappear into the ether, and had an argument with my husband after he hadn't returned several messages (I thought he was ignoring me).
Point being, you absolutely cannot assume anything until you talk to a person, and even then, take them literally and don't read into their words. DON'T TEXT.
posted by desjardins at 10:28 AM on October 29, 2008
I've also had text messages disappear into the ether, and had an argument with my husband after he hadn't returned several messages (I thought he was ignoring me).
Point being, you absolutely cannot assume anything until you talk to a person, and even then, take them literally and don't read into their words. DON'T TEXT.
posted by desjardins at 10:28 AM on October 29, 2008
you're not being "that girl" unless you do call him.
[...]
he'll have to let her go abruptly. Then, maybe he's interested, but can't work up the nerve to call back.
[...]
I'd interpret a phone call as being chased, and like most living beings, when I'm chased, I run.
This is not good advice. Clearly, there's already too much confusion in their back-and-forth and any adult would be wise at this point to get simple confirmation from a phone call.
posted by kittyprecious at 10:56 AM on October 29, 2008
[...]
he'll have to let her go abruptly. Then, maybe he's interested, but can't work up the nerve to call back.
[...]
I'd interpret a phone call as being chased, and like most living beings, when I'm chased, I run.
This is not good advice. Clearly, there's already too much confusion in their back-and-forth and any adult would be wise at this point to get simple confirmation from a phone call.
posted by kittyprecious at 10:56 AM on October 29, 2008
I once met a girl through a friend, lost my phone and both his and her numbers. I IM'd my male friend, got the numbers and put them in my replacement phone. I put the numbers in correctly, then put the wrong names to each number. This went undetected by all of us for three weeks.
Never underestimate the power of boys to be complete fuckwits.
posted by vbfg at 11:06 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
Never underestimate the power of boys to be complete fuckwits.
posted by vbfg at 11:06 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
I get weird, random text messages all the time - hell, if my wife saw them she'd think I was having an affair. I typically don't reply, unless it looks like some form of emergency.
It could be that he thought you were someone else. Just ask him point-blank, if he can't own-up he ain't worth it.
When my wife & I met and had our first date it went very well. So, for the first time ever, I decided to be "hard-to-get" and let her call me. Didn't hear back from her, so I figured, "oh well". 5 weeks later, I get a call... She had lost my number, only just found it ;-)
posted by jkaczor at 11:14 AM on October 29, 2008
It could be that he thought you were someone else. Just ask him point-blank, if he can't own-up he ain't worth it.
When my wife & I met and had our first date it went very well. So, for the first time ever, I decided to be "hard-to-get" and let her call me. Didn't hear back from her, so I figured, "oh well". 5 weeks later, I get a call... She had lost my number, only just found it ;-)
posted by jkaczor at 11:14 AM on October 29, 2008
Here's what I think happened. He really didn't punch your number in correctly and before realizing he didn't put your number in correctly he deleted all your text messages (some phones have really low memory and you have to delete them regularly), then when he went to text/call you again he realized he didn't actually have your number and had already deleted your texts.
I would call, or if that's too forward for you, send him a text with your number in the body of text itself, saying hey so and so told me you lost my number, how have you been? etc etc
posted by whoaali at 11:14 AM on October 29, 2008
I would call, or if that's too forward for you, send him a text with your number in the body of text itself, saying hey so and so told me you lost my number, how have you been? etc etc
posted by whoaali at 11:14 AM on October 29, 2008
This has happened to me sometimes. Not that I would punch the wrong number in, but sometimes I forget to add it to the phonebook, and as my phones are usually full of crap I have to delete messages and call logs pretty often. That's how I would have ended up withour your number and wouldn't be able to call you.
Call him.
posted by dcrocha at 12:04 PM on October 29, 2008
Call him.
posted by dcrocha at 12:04 PM on October 29, 2008
This is not good advice. Clearly, there's already too much confusion in their back-and-forth and any adult would be wise at this point to get simple confirmation from a phone call.
If the only goal here is to clear up confusion immediately, then I agree wholeheartedly. If the main goal is to get or keep somebody interested in you, then this is just plain wrong. This isn't a business negotiation where taking the bull by the horns and seeking to clearly define what all parties want from the transaction is going to help matters. There's a time and place to be direct in relationships, but it's at least a few months and many dates down the line.
The beginning of almost any potential relationship is going to be confusing. (Does she like me? Should I call her? Is it too soon to call? Why isn't the phone ringing?) This is part of the process of finding somebody that you like and who likes you. If you're not at least a little confused at the beginning of things, then there's probably no excitement or chemistry there.
The truth is, he may not know yet. He might be potentially interested, and become actually interested if the idea has time to develop in his mind a little. If you're going to be dating, learn to accept that the confusion, anticipation, nervousness, etc., is part of the process. Getting sick of the confusion and wanting instant answers will make you look desperate this early in a potential relationship. You'll get an answer this way, sure, but it won't be the answer that you're looking for. You can very easily "frighten" someone away at this stage... someone who might otherwise have been interested.
The only thing worse than calling promptly to clear up confusion is to follow that question by asking him what he thinks about marriage, how many kids does he want to have, when does he see himself settling down, and by the way, how much money do you make and what kind of car do you drive?
Remember that we don't value the things that come easily to us. We value what is scarce, what we have to work for, what we have to fight for, what we have to wait for... not what calls us and says, "Look it, do you like me or not?"
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 12:37 PM on October 29, 2008
If the only goal here is to clear up confusion immediately, then I agree wholeheartedly. If the main goal is to get or keep somebody interested in you, then this is just plain wrong. This isn't a business negotiation where taking the bull by the horns and seeking to clearly define what all parties want from the transaction is going to help matters. There's a time and place to be direct in relationships, but it's at least a few months and many dates down the line.
The beginning of almost any potential relationship is going to be confusing. (Does she like me? Should I call her? Is it too soon to call? Why isn't the phone ringing?) This is part of the process of finding somebody that you like and who likes you. If you're not at least a little confused at the beginning of things, then there's probably no excitement or chemistry there.
The truth is, he may not know yet. He might be potentially interested, and become actually interested if the idea has time to develop in his mind a little. If you're going to be dating, learn to accept that the confusion, anticipation, nervousness, etc., is part of the process. Getting sick of the confusion and wanting instant answers will make you look desperate this early in a potential relationship. You'll get an answer this way, sure, but it won't be the answer that you're looking for. You can very easily "frighten" someone away at this stage... someone who might otherwise have been interested.
The only thing worse than calling promptly to clear up confusion is to follow that question by asking him what he thinks about marriage, how many kids does he want to have, when does he see himself settling down, and by the way, how much money do you make and what kind of car do you drive?
Remember that we don't value the things that come easily to us. We value what is scarce, what we have to work for, what we have to fight for, what we have to wait for... not what calls us and says, "Look it, do you like me or not?"
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 12:37 PM on October 29, 2008
Oh baloney. Call him and say "hey, enjoyed talking to you the other night. I have some free time on Friday afternoon, want to grab a cup of coffee?" or something similarly concrete and non-scary. If he is temporarily spooked by this, at least he has your number. If he's permanently spooked by it, what a wuss.
posted by LobsterMitten at 1:14 PM on October 29, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten at 1:14 PM on October 29, 2008 [2 favorites]
LobsterMitten has it. Call him. What's the worst that can happen?
posted by sveskemus at 1:26 PM on October 29, 2008
posted by sveskemus at 1:26 PM on October 29, 2008
Texting causes so much trouble and confusion. Terrible way to communicate. I've seen variations of this story over and over.
posted by Area Control at 1:43 PM on October 29, 2008
posted by Area Control at 1:43 PM on October 29, 2008
There's a time and place to be direct in relationships, but it's at least a few months and many dates down the line.
Oh baloney. How does anyone even get a date then if they can't manage to say "I'd like to see you again" in a direct way?
OP, you're overthinking this. Call him.
posted by oneirodynia at 2:44 PM on October 29, 2008
Oh baloney. How does anyone even get a date then if they can't manage to say "I'd like to see you again" in a direct way?
OP, you're overthinking this. Call him.
posted by oneirodynia at 2:44 PM on October 29, 2008
Be brave! Call and ask him out. Then, no questions, you'll know for sure if he wants to see you again. He may have screwed up and deleted your number later---who knows, but it seems unusual to do all this just to avoid you. That doesn't mean that isn't the case----there are certainly some weirdos out there---but the average not-interested person drops contact or just keeps playing the "busy" card when date invites come up.
posted by lacedback at 2:59 PM on October 29, 2008
posted by lacedback at 2:59 PM on October 29, 2008
Jesus Christ. Kids today. You know what us grown-ups did in the days before SMS? WE CALLED EACH OTHER. That's how we dated, hooked up, got married and lived happily ever after. We didn't even have email!
Just pick up the phone and say, "Hi, it's Anonymous from Freddy's Bar. Glad we're finally in touch. Want to get coffee?"
I'm all for progress and shit, but seriously, this method has worked reliably since 1896.
posted by DarlingBri at 3:21 PM on October 29, 2008 [3 favorites]
Just pick up the phone and say, "Hi, it's Anonymous from Freddy's Bar. Glad we're finally in touch. Want to get coffee?"
I'm all for progress and shit, but seriously, this method has worked reliably since 1896.
posted by DarlingBri at 3:21 PM on October 29, 2008 [3 favorites]
I wish I could favorite what DarlingBri just said a bagillion times. A voice of sanity in an insane world. OP was already direct enough to tell the guy she thought he was cute, and that went fine. Why play coy now? Just call the guy and ask him out.
(And I'm from the texting generation).
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 4:10 PM on October 29, 2008
(And I'm from the texting generation).
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 4:10 PM on October 29, 2008
Also: The only thing worse than calling promptly to clear up confusion is to follow that question by asking him what he thinks about marriage, how many kids does he want to have, when does he see himself settling down, and by the way, how much money do you make and what kind of car do you drive?
The truth comes out. When a woman calls a man, it can only mean that she's a spookymanchaser. Watch out, she might poke holes in condoms to trap a man!
Seriously, OP, don't play games. Confidence is sexy, and it's already paid off once with this guy. You have no reason to think he'll be scared of it in the future.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 4:14 PM on October 29, 2008
The truth comes out. When a woman calls a man, it can only mean that she's a spookymanchaser. Watch out, she might poke holes in condoms to trap a man!
Seriously, OP, don't play games. Confidence is sexy, and it's already paid off once with this guy. You have no reason to think he'll be scared of it in the future.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 4:14 PM on October 29, 2008
How does anyone even get a date then if they can't manage to say "I'd like to see you again" in a direct way?
The same way that they manage to get service when they go into a restaurant without directly saying "I've entered this establishment to obtain and ingest food, will you ask me what I would like to eat?". There are plenty of ways to get your point across without speaking. Ever hear that "actions speak louder than words" or that 93% of communication is nonverbal? You hear it because it's true. (Incidentally, smiling, laughing at his jokes, acting like you're having fun with him, and acting like he's interesting go a long way. Don't overdo it, though. You don't want to seem like you just came from a Dale Carnegie seminar.)
IMHO, I think that there might be too many women giving advice here on the basis of what they wished men responded to, rather than what men actually respond to.
OP, I'll state what should be obvious: Men and women approach and interact with potential mates in different ways. While it's certainly socially acceptable for a woman to call a man in 2008, that doesn't mean that it's the best thing to do if you want the guy to like you. (It certainly could be, depending on the circumstances, but as a general proposition, it's not.)
Males have evolved over millions of years to thrive on "the thrill of the hunt", for lack of a better phrase. Yes, it's not the 50's anymore, and, yes, no one with a brain will think you're a tramp for calling a man, but 50 years of social change don't counteract millions of years of evolution. With most males, if they don't view you as something to be pursued -- an achievement that they think (hope) they can obtain, but aren't quite certain -- then they're not going to pursue you. What you don't want to do is take away that "thrill of the hunt". By calling and asking out most males (even for coffee), you risk doing just that. It's far better to give him plenty of time to ask you out first.
If all of that makes it sound like most men are simple, predictable, and easily manipulated, it's because we are (so long as you know how we're wired).
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 4:21 PM on October 29, 2008
The same way that they manage to get service when they go into a restaurant without directly saying "I've entered this establishment to obtain and ingest food, will you ask me what I would like to eat?". There are plenty of ways to get your point across without speaking. Ever hear that "actions speak louder than words" or that 93% of communication is nonverbal? You hear it because it's true. (Incidentally, smiling, laughing at his jokes, acting like you're having fun with him, and acting like he's interesting go a long way. Don't overdo it, though. You don't want to seem like you just came from a Dale Carnegie seminar.)
IMHO, I think that there might be too many women giving advice here on the basis of what they wished men responded to, rather than what men actually respond to.
OP, I'll state what should be obvious: Men and women approach and interact with potential mates in different ways. While it's certainly socially acceptable for a woman to call a man in 2008, that doesn't mean that it's the best thing to do if you want the guy to like you. (It certainly could be, depending on the circumstances, but as a general proposition, it's not.)
Males have evolved over millions of years to thrive on "the thrill of the hunt", for lack of a better phrase. Yes, it's not the 50's anymore, and, yes, no one with a brain will think you're a tramp for calling a man, but 50 years of social change don't counteract millions of years of evolution. With most males, if they don't view you as something to be pursued -- an achievement that they think (hope) they can obtain, but aren't quite certain -- then they're not going to pursue you. What you don't want to do is take away that "thrill of the hunt". By calling and asking out most males (even for coffee), you risk doing just that. It's far better to give him plenty of time to ask you out first.
If all of that makes it sound like most men are simple, predictable, and easily manipulated, it's because we are (so long as you know how we're wired).
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 4:21 PM on October 29, 2008
The truth comes out. When a woman calls a man, it can only mean that she's a spookymanchaser. Watch out, she might poke holes in condoms to trap a man!
If the only options here were (1) spookymanchaser or (2) plain-speaking woman who's going to get what she wants, then you might have a valid point. While we might wish that things were that simple, they're not.
In the real world, there are a zillion other ways that such a phone call could be interpreted, the most common of which will be a variation on this theme: Cool... somebody likes me. Maybe I'll give her a call sometime. I wonder what's on TV. Sweet. Welcome Back Kotter. ZZzzzzzz. [end of story, fade to black, roll credits]
And it's not "playing games" not to jump on every impulse that you have. There's a difference between not telling everything that you know and telling things that aren't true. A big difference.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 4:42 PM on October 29, 2008
If the only options here were (1) spookymanchaser or (2) plain-speaking woman who's going to get what she wants, then you might have a valid point. While we might wish that things were that simple, they're not.
In the real world, there are a zillion other ways that such a phone call could be interpreted, the most common of which will be a variation on this theme: Cool... somebody likes me. Maybe I'll give her a call sometime. I wonder what's on TV. Sweet. Welcome Back Kotter. ZZzzzzzz. [end of story, fade to black, roll credits]
And it's not "playing games" not to jump on every impulse that you have. There's a difference between not telling everything that you know and telling things that aren't true. A big difference.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 4:42 PM on October 29, 2008
While it's certainly socially acceptable for a woman to call a man in 2008, that doesn't mean that it's the best thing to do if you want the guy to like you. (It certainly could be, depending on the circumstances, but as a general proposition, it's not.)
As a general proposition, that's a bunch of bogus bullshit.
The idea that a woman has to pretend to be something other than what she is - confident, focused and goal-oriented, for example - to land a man is appalling. The idea that relationships should start with the parties on each side respectively playing mind games with each other is extremely repugnant.
With most males, if they don't view you as something to be pursued -- an achievement that they think (hope) they can obtain, but aren't quite certain -- then they're not going to pursue you.
Oh dear God, it's The Conquistador Archetype. This does men such a disservice. I know plenty - plenty - of men who are absolutely delighted to meet women who are happy to dispense with this song and dance and simply communicate clearly, with language. "I really like you, would you like to get naked?" beats the hell out of semiphone over cocktails for a lot of people of all genders.
Please stop bandying this shit around. If it's the way you personally prefer to carry on your interpersonal relationships because it's your personal comfort zone, that's 100% fine. But there is no need and no grounds for you to generalise that to other people's experiences. You get to speak for yourself, not for your gender. Because you can't.
posted by DarlingBri at 5:43 PM on October 29, 2008 [6 favorites]
As a general proposition, that's a bunch of bogus bullshit.
The idea that a woman has to pretend to be something other than what she is - confident, focused and goal-oriented, for example - to land a man is appalling. The idea that relationships should start with the parties on each side respectively playing mind games with each other is extremely repugnant.
With most males, if they don't view you as something to be pursued -- an achievement that they think (hope) they can obtain, but aren't quite certain -- then they're not going to pursue you.
Oh dear God, it's The Conquistador Archetype. This does men such a disservice. I know plenty - plenty - of men who are absolutely delighted to meet women who are happy to dispense with this song and dance and simply communicate clearly, with language. "I really like you, would you like to get naked?" beats the hell out of semiphone over cocktails for a lot of people of all genders.
Please stop bandying this shit around. If it's the way you personally prefer to carry on your interpersonal relationships because it's your personal comfort zone, that's 100% fine. But there is no need and no grounds for you to generalise that to other people's experiences. You get to speak for yourself, not for your gender. Because you can't.
posted by DarlingBri at 5:43 PM on October 29, 2008 [6 favorites]
as a guy, i am absolutely delighted to meet women who are happy to dispense with this song and dance and simply communicate clearly, with language. "I really like you, would you like to get naked?" beats the hell out of semiphone over cocktails for a lot of people of all genders.
as for the question, jebus, steady on, tiger! it's only been a day, hasn't it? there's no great hurry!
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:30 PM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
as for the question, jebus, steady on, tiger! it's only been a day, hasn't it? there's no great hurry!
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:30 PM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]
Jesus Christ. Kids today. You know what us grown-ups did in the days before SMS? WE CALLED EACH OTHER.
And you know what they did before phones? Asked each other out in person. The rules of conduct have changed. Asking for phone numbers and calling right away can be (in some circles) a bit forward. in my case (super social-networked) the first thing I'd expect is an add on Twitter, then Facebook, then maybe a FriendFeed comment, then an add as a contact on Flickr, then, possibly, an email...
I'm exaggerating, but you get the the point.
posted by timoni at 11:53 PM on October 29, 2008
And you know what they did before phones? Asked each other out in person. The rules of conduct have changed. Asking for phone numbers and calling right away can be (in some circles) a bit forward. in my case (super social-networked) the first thing I'd expect is an add on Twitter, then Facebook, then maybe a FriendFeed comment, then an add as a contact on Flickr, then, possibly, an email...
I'm exaggerating, but you get the the point.
posted by timoni at 11:53 PM on October 29, 2008
IMHO, I think that there might be too many women giving advice here on the basis of what they wished men responded to, rather than what men actually respond to.
Yes, because everyone knows that women always give advice about stuff that hasn't actually worked for them, but is how they would like things to be. Every single poster here saying to communicate like an adult is in reality a lonely single woman desperately hoping that by typing this sort of thing on a website, it's going to change the world, and they will suddenly get a date.
Making assumptions about your fellow posters' gender and motivation without any acknowledgment that their experience may be informing their responses is unwise and unhelpful. Stick to what you know, and stop blindly generalizing about people you've never met.
posted by oneirodynia at 1:10 PM on October 30, 2008 [2 favorites]
Yes, because everyone knows that women always give advice about stuff that hasn't actually worked for them, but is how they would like things to be. Every single poster here saying to communicate like an adult is in reality a lonely single woman desperately hoping that by typing this sort of thing on a website, it's going to change the world, and they will suddenly get a date.
Making assumptions about your fellow posters' gender and motivation without any acknowledgment that their experience may be informing their responses is unwise and unhelpful. Stick to what you know, and stop blindly generalizing about people you've never met.
posted by oneirodynia at 1:10 PM on October 30, 2008 [2 favorites]
@DarlingBri:
As a general proposition, that's a bunch of bogus bullshit.
Which part? That it’s socially acceptable for a woman to call a man in 2008? That, that doesn’t mean that it’s the best thing to do if a woman wants a man to like her? That it could be the best thing depending on the circumstances?
The idea that a woman has to pretend to be something other than what she is - confident, focused and goal-oriented, for example - to land a man is appalling. The idea that relationships should start with the parties on each side respectively playing mind games with each other is extremely repugnant.
I haven’t suggested that anybody play any mind games. Further, I’m in complete agreement that “[t]he idea that a woman has to pretend to be something other than what she is . . . to land a man is appalling.” I don’t know whose statements you’re assailing, but they’re not mine.
Oh dear God, it's The Conquistador Archetype. This does men such a disservice. I know plenty - plenty - of men who are absolutely delighted to meet women who are happy to dispense with this song and dance and simply communicate clearly, with language. "I really like you, would you like to get naked?" beats the hell out of semiphone over cocktails for a lot of people of all genders.
I know lots of men like that too. I’m one of those men, as a matter of fact… I wasn’t under the impression that the OP was just looking to get naked though. If all a woman wants is a one-night stand, then I think you’re right: This kind of directness is the quickest way to get there.
(I don’t know what “semiphone” is, but I’m inclined to agree that, whatever it is, it probably doesn’t beat directly asking “would you like to get naked?” if that’s all a woman is after.)
Please stop bandying this shit around. If it's the way you personally prefer to carry on your interpersonal relationships because it's your personal comfort zone, that's 100% fine. But there is no need and no grounds for you to generalise that to other people's experiences. You get to speak for yourself, not for your gender. Because you can't.
I don’t know how I would go about speaking for a gender, even if I were inclined to do so. As for my sex (male), there most certainly are grounds for the things that I say. Believe it or not, people actually study this kind of thing. (I had to read more of it than I wanted to as an undergraduate.) One topical study: Hatfield, E., Walster, G. W., Piliavin, J., & Schmidt, L. (1973). Playing hard-to-get: Understanding an elusive phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 113-121. (By the way, “playing hard to get” is not an effective strategy. The idea is that it’s helpful to seem hard for other guys to get… not the guy whom you want to like you… Again, making him feel like he’s achieved something that is worth achieving.)
@UbuRoivas
as a guy, i am absolutely delighted to meet women who are happy to dispense with this song and dance and simply communicate clearly, with language.
Me too. We all like to feel attractive… but that’s not really the point.
@23skidoo:
IMHO, there are too many men here giving advice based on the false assumption that what works on them and the guys they know will probably work on the majority of men. Now granted, it does seem like just one guy saying this, but even one guy begging the question like this is one guy too many.
Huh? “Begging the question” is circular reasoning. If you really think that I’ve done that, then please point out the circularity, and I’ll do my best to straighten it out. My advice is based on the assumption that the people who conducted the studies and research that I had to read weren’t lying.
@oneirodynia:
Making assumptions about your fellow posters' gender and motivation without any acknowledgment that their experience may be informing their responses is unwise and unhelpful. Stick to what you know, and stop blindly generalizing about people you've never met.
Ouch. Obviously I don’t hold the popular viewpoint here. Still…
The truth isn’t up for a vote. A widely believed lie is still a lie. The earth was just as round when everyone said it was flat.
If Darwin said the sky was green, he wouldn’t have been the object of so much derision. People would have laughed it off. They railed against him because they were threatened by the idea that they “came from monkeys”.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 5:01 PM on October 31, 2008
As a general proposition, that's a bunch of bogus bullshit.
Which part? That it’s socially acceptable for a woman to call a man in 2008? That, that doesn’t mean that it’s the best thing to do if a woman wants a man to like her? That it could be the best thing depending on the circumstances?
The idea that a woman has to pretend to be something other than what she is - confident, focused and goal-oriented, for example - to land a man is appalling. The idea that relationships should start with the parties on each side respectively playing mind games with each other is extremely repugnant.
I haven’t suggested that anybody play any mind games. Further, I’m in complete agreement that “[t]he idea that a woman has to pretend to be something other than what she is . . . to land a man is appalling.” I don’t know whose statements you’re assailing, but they’re not mine.
Oh dear God, it's The Conquistador Archetype. This does men such a disservice. I know plenty - plenty - of men who are absolutely delighted to meet women who are happy to dispense with this song and dance and simply communicate clearly, with language. "I really like you, would you like to get naked?" beats the hell out of semiphone over cocktails for a lot of people of all genders.
I know lots of men like that too. I’m one of those men, as a matter of fact… I wasn’t under the impression that the OP was just looking to get naked though. If all a woman wants is a one-night stand, then I think you’re right: This kind of directness is the quickest way to get there.
(I don’t know what “semiphone” is, but I’m inclined to agree that, whatever it is, it probably doesn’t beat directly asking “would you like to get naked?” if that’s all a woman is after.)
Please stop bandying this shit around. If it's the way you personally prefer to carry on your interpersonal relationships because it's your personal comfort zone, that's 100% fine. But there is no need and no grounds for you to generalise that to other people's experiences. You get to speak for yourself, not for your gender. Because you can't.
I don’t know how I would go about speaking for a gender, even if I were inclined to do so. As for my sex (male), there most certainly are grounds for the things that I say. Believe it or not, people actually study this kind of thing. (I had to read more of it than I wanted to as an undergraduate.) One topical study: Hatfield, E., Walster, G. W., Piliavin, J., & Schmidt, L. (1973). Playing hard-to-get: Understanding an elusive phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 113-121. (By the way, “playing hard to get” is not an effective strategy. The idea is that it’s helpful to seem hard for other guys to get… not the guy whom you want to like you… Again, making him feel like he’s achieved something that is worth achieving.)
@UbuRoivas
as a guy, i am absolutely delighted to meet women who are happy to dispense with this song and dance and simply communicate clearly, with language.
Me too. We all like to feel attractive… but that’s not really the point.
@23skidoo:
IMHO, there are too many men here giving advice based on the false assumption that what works on them and the guys they know will probably work on the majority of men. Now granted, it does seem like just one guy saying this, but even one guy begging the question like this is one guy too many.
Huh? “Begging the question” is circular reasoning. If you really think that I’ve done that, then please point out the circularity, and I’ll do my best to straighten it out. My advice is based on the assumption that the people who conducted the studies and research that I had to read weren’t lying.
@oneirodynia:
Making assumptions about your fellow posters' gender and motivation without any acknowledgment that their experience may be informing their responses is unwise and unhelpful. Stick to what you know, and stop blindly generalizing about people you've never met.
Ouch. Obviously I don’t hold the popular viewpoint here. Still…
The truth isn’t up for a vote. A widely believed lie is still a lie. The earth was just as round when everyone said it was flat.
If Darwin said the sky was green, he wouldn’t have been the object of so much derision. People would have laughed it off. They railed against him because they were threatened by the idea that they “came from monkeys”.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 5:01 PM on October 31, 2008
@23skidoo:
I take that back.
Thank you. I appreciate that.
When I get my Delorean out of the shop and go back to 1973, I'll be able to take the one study you cited to heart about females playing hard to get, but it's 35 years after that study came out. Things are so different now that a study such as that is completely meaningless.
Really? I wasn't aware that the truth had an expiration date. By your standard, the Pythagorean theorem must be in serious doubt since it's thousands of years old now. What is the average lifespan of the truth? (By the way 35 years is nothing on an evolutionary scale.)
Further, using your standard, I'll be able to take the study you cited to heart... wait a minute.... you didn't cite any studies. Why the double standard?
In any event, here's another study: Baker, M., Maner, J. (2008). Risk-taking as a situationally sensitive male mating strategy. Evolution and Human Behavior, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 391-395. Hopefully you won't need your DeLorean for that one.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 7:42 AM on November 1, 2008
I take that back.
Thank you. I appreciate that.
When I get my Delorean out of the shop and go back to 1973, I'll be able to take the one study you cited to heart about females playing hard to get, but it's 35 years after that study came out. Things are so different now that a study such as that is completely meaningless.
Really? I wasn't aware that the truth had an expiration date. By your standard, the Pythagorean theorem must be in serious doubt since it's thousands of years old now. What is the average lifespan of the truth? (By the way 35 years is nothing on an evolutionary scale.)
Further, using your standard, I'll be able to take the study you cited to heart... wait a minute.... you didn't cite any studies. Why the double standard?
In any event, here's another study: Baker, M., Maner, J. (2008). Risk-taking as a situationally sensitive male mating strategy. Evolution and Human Behavior, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 391-395. Hopefully you won't need your DeLorean for that one.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 7:42 AM on November 1, 2008
@23skidoo:
Did you read more than the abstract?
"A large body of evidence suggests that men are more
inclined to take risks than women (e.g., Byrnes, Miller, &
Schaffer, 1999). Daly and Wilson hypothesized that this sex
difference is rooted in the fact that men have faced greater
intrasexual competition than women have (e.g., Daly &
Wilson, 1994; Wilson, Daly, Gordon, Pratt, 1996). Indeed,
parental investment theory (Trivers, 1972) implies that men
compete with one another over mating opportunities to a
greater extent than women do. Among men, risky behaviors
have potential for displaying to potential mates characteristics
such as social dominance, confidence, ambition, skill
and mental acuity, all of which are highly desired by women
seeking a romantic partner (Buss, 1989; Li, Bailey, Kenrick,
& Linsenmeier, 2002). In addition, risk-taking can signal to
other men one's value as an ally or formidability as an
adversary, and thus help men compete with one another over
potential mates. Whether the intended audience is women or
other men, risk-taking can signal positive traits and, in turn,
increase a man's access to mating opportunities. Because
male risk-taking is thought to be derived ultimately from
intrasexual competition over potential mating opportunities,
we predict that interest in procuring a mate will be associated
with increased risk-taking among men." [This hypothesis was
confirmed by the study. Women did not display this associa-
tion.]
First, please note that the authors of the study evidently do not share your belief that studies conducted in the 70's have gone bad, as they cite one in this excerpt.
Secondly, it should be obvious from the excerpt that there are differences in the way that men and women approach mating strategy, that men are more inclined to take risks ("thrill of the hunt" ring a bell?), that a spirit of competition is involved when men are choosing a mate, etc.
As suggested in this excerpt, and by me previously in this Ask MeFi, there is a "large body" of work available for review in this area. I have shown you that my opinion is based on peer-reviewed science, and not "based on the false assumption that what works on them and the guys they know will probably work on the majority of men" as you stated. There's a ton of stuff out there that supports my position here if you care to read it. I've presented enough information for anyone interested to review the data for themselves. You can persist in your point of view if you insist on it. There are, after all, people who still insist that the moon landing was faked on a Hollywood sound stage.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 2:43 PM on November 1, 2008
Did you read more than the abstract?
"A large body of evidence suggests that men are more
inclined to take risks than women (e.g., Byrnes, Miller, &
Schaffer, 1999). Daly and Wilson hypothesized that this sex
difference is rooted in the fact that men have faced greater
intrasexual competition than women have (e.g., Daly &
Wilson, 1994; Wilson, Daly, Gordon, Pratt, 1996). Indeed,
parental investment theory (Trivers, 1972) implies that men
compete with one another over mating opportunities to a
greater extent than women do. Among men, risky behaviors
have potential for displaying to potential mates characteristics
such as social dominance, confidence, ambition, skill
and mental acuity, all of which are highly desired by women
seeking a romantic partner (Buss, 1989; Li, Bailey, Kenrick,
& Linsenmeier, 2002). In addition, risk-taking can signal to
other men one's value as an ally or formidability as an
adversary, and thus help men compete with one another over
potential mates. Whether the intended audience is women or
other men, risk-taking can signal positive traits and, in turn,
increase a man's access to mating opportunities. Because
male risk-taking is thought to be derived ultimately from
intrasexual competition over potential mating opportunities,
we predict that interest in procuring a mate will be associated
with increased risk-taking among men." [This hypothesis was
confirmed by the study. Women did not display this associa-
tion.]
First, please note that the authors of the study evidently do not share your belief that studies conducted in the 70's have gone bad, as they cite one in this excerpt.
Secondly, it should be obvious from the excerpt that there are differences in the way that men and women approach mating strategy, that men are more inclined to take risks ("thrill of the hunt" ring a bell?), that a spirit of competition is involved when men are choosing a mate, etc.
As suggested in this excerpt, and by me previously in this Ask MeFi, there is a "large body" of work available for review in this area. I have shown you that my opinion is based on peer-reviewed science, and not "based on the false assumption that what works on them and the guys they know will probably work on the majority of men" as you stated. There's a ton of stuff out there that supports my position here if you care to read it. I've presented enough information for anyone interested to review the data for themselves. You can persist in your point of view if you insist on it. There are, after all, people who still insist that the moon landing was faked on a Hollywood sound stage.
posted by The Man Mulcahey at 2:43 PM on November 1, 2008
"Peer-reviewed science", in the sphere of psychology (and in particular, self-reported sexual behaviour) might not quite be as hard & scientific as your patronising "moon landing" conclusion would warrant.
In practical terms, for the OP: whatever The Man Mulcahey said does not necessarily apply to your beau. People are individuals, and the "large body of work" about the "thrill of the hunt" is something you could happily ignore.
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:22 AM on November 2, 2008
In practical terms, for the OP: whatever The Man Mulcahey said does not necessarily apply to your beau. People are individuals, and the "large body of work" about the "thrill of the hunt" is something you could happily ignore.
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:22 AM on November 2, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 8:20 AM on October 29, 2008 [1 favorite]