How do People Recognise Flirting?

[Ereth]

No worries.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

Yes I have been slapped three times.

The first time was in high school I was on a date with a girl and she said to me "do something naughty." When I did she slapped me. I did not believe then and I do not believe now she was entitled to slap me for complying with her request.

The second time was in college and without going into details I deserved it and apologized.

The third time was during a verbal discussion that was completely unrelated to romance. The woman had a history of being sexually abused as a child and something I said triggered her to slap me. I was not physically interested in her, never touched her, and my conversation had nothing to do with sex. I was dumbfounded by her action and completely clueless as to what it was I did or said.

What is wrong with women these days?! I just can't believe you guys have been hit like that. It would be very difficult for me to hit anyone and that's why I'm having a hard time digesting that all these women find it so easy to slap a person. Did you stay after you were hit?

 

[Judge]

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

To borrow your phrase, "Fair enough."



For the record, I don't care for "games" generally as the term is used in the context of flirting/dating. However, as I've pointed out, I coped my way through flirting and dating with extensive "rules." Sometimes I think I was so focused on what worked and what didn't for purposes of rule-making, that the whole process would feel arbitrary not unlike the rules of a game. Rules were at best generally effective, with no rule working for 100% of women I dated. For example, after what date is it appropriate to try a kiss? I eventually came to 3 dates unless she sooner made her desire to kill plain. How many dates before I am "leading her on" (whatever that means)? I eventually settled on not a number of dates but dating for more than three months required some sort of "DTR" (define the relationship). Does she have to ask me for exclusivity or is it expected...

So many rules. Sometimes it was fun; others not so much. All I wanted to was to find a way to successfully date. Eventually, with time, it became fun. It was not so in the beginning. Mostly this is because girls would say things they didn't mean. "Can't talk now, call me later" might mean "leave me alone." "I have a boyfriend" might mean she's single but just doesn't like me. "I have to wash my hair" ... well that one is pretty obvious but why not just give me honesty? Sure, some women are honest and say what they mean. Many do not. I never had a problem with being told, "You're not my type." I can't be every girl's type - most guys can't. This saves time and allows me to move on. Telling me you'd like to get together then never setting an actual date? That is weak and wastes my time. Telling me you're not interested but then flirting with me? That is confusing. I already mentioned a girl who told me she wasn't interested but then ended up dating me on and off for a year. How did that happen is she meant what she said? There is no universal constant here. No rosetta stone. It is just trial, error, and probabilities.



Yes, there are male and female jerks. I have never dated a guy, so I have never personally had one "play games" with me, but I have no trouble believing that guys too play games with girls. I just lack personal experiences necessary to comment on the subject. I imagine I did "play games" sometimes when I saw that it got results. I was crafting rules based on outcomes. Took me a while to find a compatible woman with whom I could have straightforward conversation and still get positive results. First one who came along, I proposed after 3 dates. I had sufficient data from past dating experiences to recognize her value immediately. We had our first date in March and got married in August.

I thought about you tonight at work, Mr. Icesyckel. I have a patient whose husband is staying with her and they are just the cutest couple. They've been married like 67 years and met in grade school. She can't hear a thing and he's in there yelling at her trying to explain certain things. She's moaning from not feeling good and he said "she's moaning just like a taxpayer." He said they both never dated anyone else. How sweet. Sounds like a match made in heaven!

 

[epath13]

How to Spot a Flirt | Psychology Today something to think about most people can't recognize when somebody's flirting with them

 

[icesyckel]

It's movies that are to blame for giving the wrong impression of how things are supposed to go. I'm currently watching "27 Dresses" and the main character likes her boss (she is a wedding planner). Anyway, at one of the weddings this other guy sees her and wants to go out on a date, but she says "No". He keeps asking and even sends her flowers! She comes out and tells him to leave her alone and stop his "creepiness". He continues and she eventually goes out with him for drinks when she finds out her boss is interested in her sister. I bet I know how the story is going to end - this woman will start liking the guy who was persistent and who had sent her flowers and they will get married. That's a "chick flick" for ya! This woman even got slapped in the movie too! Imagine that. Only difference was it was her getting slapped by her co-worker for being so interested in her boss - no guy got slapped that I'm aware of ...... yet.

In my case, I had women I went to grad school explain that they wanted a man to "pursue" them. I think they have watched a lot of those "chick flicks" like the one you've described, and they want to marry a man whose pursuit will offer them their own faerie tale romance story that they can tell their children and grandchildren. It sounds great. I remember pointing out to them, though, that they wouldn't enjoy being pursued by a guy in whom they had no interest. They of course disagreed along the lines of "every guy has his merits," and "it takes time to get to know someone," implying that they might not like a guy but might come to like him as he continues his dogged pursuit over their feigned objections.

This seemed silly to me at the time, and it still seems silly to me now, but this was a large group of girls I befriended in grad school who all were reasonably nice girls. Other than having silly notions of dating and relationships born out of watching too many black and white romance films from the 40s and 50s, they were fairly normal, well-mannered ladies. I suppose they are entitled to want what they want.

But what they want is confusing for guys like me, because the majority of women on this forum have agreed that when a girl says "no" to a date, the guy should do anything but continue pursuing a date. Basically, I have encountered two sets of women (those here and those with whom I went to school) who have offered completely opposing sets of rules on this subject. As an aspie, I need a rule set to date.

Suffice it to say, I am happy that I am married, but for some reason I still think about this contradiction in data a lot. If my wife predeceases or leaves me, and if I ever have to start dating again, then I might just not bother. It's too difficult to get consistent rules, and most women seem to speak in absolutes.

For example, everyone here has made it clear that once a girl turns a guy down for a date, he is to stop asking/pursuing or risk jail, a restraining order, etc. However, other girls have told me they never agree to the first invitation and sometimes only relent after the guy goes to ridiculous lengths to "win them over." As men, especially men on the spectrum, how are we to know which category a prospective lady falls in? Either we follow the rules of the former category, and offend the latter, or we do the latter and offend the former. Are girls who wish to be "pursued" not entitled to that? By contrast, I am certain that ladies who wish to be left alone after the first refusal/rejection are entitled to be left alone.

If you ask any given woman the answer, then you will usually get a firm response, but if you ask another, then you may get an equally firm but totally opposite response. Those men (and probably women too - though I obviously cannot speak from experience) who rely on establishing social rules/protocols as a coping mechanism for ASD are in a unenviable position, getting back to my original point about dating and flirting.

This issue continues to bother me b/c I know it continues to cause difficulties for even the NT guys I know. The bottom line is that the two responses that I've gotten from different women cannot be reconciled. There is no "middle ground." Either you cease pursuit or you don't. You can't really half-stop something.

 

[icesyckel]

What is wrong with women these days?! I just can't believe you guys have been hit like that. It would be very difficult for me to hit anyone and that's why I'm having a hard time digesting that all these women find it so easy to slap a person. Did you stay after you were hit?

I had many guy friends in college who were slapped. Granted, some of them said or did some crappy things to provoke the slapping, so I don't really sympathize with them.

That said, it's not really all that uncommon for a guy to get slapped at least once while dating. Date enough women, and sooner or later you're gonna meet one who thinks she's Scarlet O'Hara. This is because women slap men in the movies a lot. I started to say "old movies," but I still see this a lot in modern movies too. Apparently it is good Youtube fun too. See here.

As to staying after getting hit, I feel like no person is perfect. I know plenty of women who love to repeat that tired old refrain: "it's so hard to find a good man these days." Well, it can be hard for guys to find decent women too. Heck, now that I think about it, my wife slapped me pretty hard right before we got married. I wasn't going to throw away our future together because she slapped me. She has good qualities that outweigh one hard slap. 6 years of marriage prove that. Now, granted, I had done something to provoke the slap. On rare occasions she still slaps or punches me in the arm when I do something to provoke her (like pinching her bum in public - I've never hit or slapped her), but I love her. I would endure a barrage of slaps to keep her.

So, you can't really blame Loomis if he didn't leave immediately after getting slapped. There's more to people than their "bad" qualities. Now, as I said before, if she is just violent or slapping without provocation, she'd better have some damn fine qualities...

 

[icesyckel]

I thought about you tonight at work, Mr. Icesyckel. I have a patient whose husband is staying with her and they are just the cutest couple. They've been married like 67 years and met in grade school. She can't hear a thing and he's in there yelling at her trying to explain certain things. She's moaning from not feeling good and he said "she's moaning just like a taxpayer." He said they both never dated anyone else. How sweet. Sounds like a match made in heaven!

I only hope that my wife and I will be yelling into each others' hearing aids when we're 120.

My wife didn't date a lot before we got married, or so she claims. I can't say the same, but I do think we're like your elderly couple in that we are together for the long haul, committed to loving each other as long as we can.

 

[Ylva]

I know an autistic man whose policy is to only date women on the spectrum.

 

[icesyckel]

I know an autistic man whose policy is to only date women on the spectrum.

I suspect that could actually be easier from a dating perspective. I mean, I am guessing that women on the spectrum may be more logical/straightforward on average, allowing for exceptions of course. Also, you'd have something in common, and you wouldn't have to worry about how to speak "NT" when getting to know her.

However, what is easier when dating might not be easier or "better" in terms of marriage. It is unfortunate that, while dating is an excellent way to meet and get to know people, two people who enjoy dating each other may not enjoy being married to each other, and vice versa. After dating allows you to meet and get to know someone, it has done its job. Dating is not a good indicator of marriage potential.

For example, I think I am better off having married an NT. We each see things the other doesn't. She helps me with social "cues," and I help her see "outside the box." Each person offers a different set of strengths. Now, granted, my wife is more "straightforward" than your average NT and, for example, hates small talk/BS, but I had her take several screenings, and she is as NT as it gets (we had a 7-hour drive and an iPad, so we killed time screening her on various sites for "fun").

When dating, we did all kinds of fun activities (e.g., baseball game, dinner, movie, etc.). When married, however, your every meeting is not going on fun "dates" all the time. You do chores together, go shopping together, plan your life together, etc. You go out on "dates" when you can, but it's different. For starters, the anticipation is gone about when to land that first kiss, etc. 90% of the time, if I take my wife to a romantic dinner, I'm gonna get more than a kiss. So, it is a different dynamic. You're not nervous. You still have a good time, but you both know you're going home together to more chores, work, and stress.

I can tell you that how well we "clicked" while dating really had nothing to do with how well we got alone after the honeymoon. In fact, I think when we got back after our honeymoon, my wife and I hard a really, really hard time adjusting to life together for about a year. Looking back on the dating it had all been so easy.

Here's the TL;DR version: you may find it easier to date someone else on the spectrum, but I have doubts that said "easiness" will translate to marriage or a long-term potential; it is good to be married to someone who is different as you will complement each others strengths and weaknesses.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

In my case, I had women I went to grad school explain that they wanted a man to "pursue" them. I think they have watched a lot of those "chick flicks" like the one you've described, and they want to marry a man whose pursuit will offer them their own faerie tale romance story that they can tell their children and grandchildren. It sounds great. I remember pointing out to them, though, that they wouldn't enjoy being pursued by a guy in whom they had no interest. They of course disagreed along the lines of "every guy has his merits," and "it takes time to get to know someone," implying that they might not like a guy but might come to like him as he continues his dogged pursuit over their feigned objections.

This seemed silly to me at the time, and it still seems silly to me now, but this was a large group of girls I befriended in grad school who all were reasonably nice girls. Other than having silly notions of dating and relationships born out of watching too many black and white romance films from the 40s and 50s, they were fairly normal, well-mannered ladies. I suppose they are entitled to want what they want.

But what they want is confusing for guys like me, because the majority of women on this forum have agreed that when a girl says "no" to a date, the guy should do anything but continue pursuing a date. Basically, I have encountered two sets of women (those here and those with whom I went to school) who have offered completely opposing sets of rules on this subject. As an aspie, I need a rule set to date.

Suffice it to say, I am happy that I am married, but for some reason I still think about this contradiction in data a lot. If my wife predeceases or leaves me, and if I ever have to start dating again, then I might just not bother. It's too difficult to get consistent rules, and most women seem to speak in absolutes.

For example, everyone here has made it clear that once a girl turns a guy down for a date, he is to stop asking/pursuing or risk jail, a restraining order, etc. However, other girls have told me they never agree to the first invitation and sometimes only relent after the guy goes to ridiculous lengths to "win them over." As men, especially men on the spectrum, how are we to know which category a prospective lady falls in? Either we follow the rules of the former category, and offend the latter, or we do the latter and offend the former. Are girls who wish to be "pursued" not entitled to that? By contrast, I am certain that ladies who wish to be left alone after the first refusal/rejection are entitled to be left alone.

If you ask any given woman the answer, then you will usually get a firm response, but if you ask another, then you may get an equally firm but totally opposite response. Those men (and probably women too - though I obviously cannot speak from experience) who rely on establishing social rules/protocols as a coping mechanism for ASD are in a unenviable position, getting back to my original point about dating and flirting.

This issue continues to bother me b/c I know it continues to cause difficulties for even the NT guys I know. The bottom line is that the two responses that I've gotten from different women cannot be reconciled. There is no "middle ground." Either you cease pursuit or you don't. You can't really half-stop something.

Hey good to see you again, Icesyckel. Thought your "sport" injury had you down and out. I'm still to tired to read everything you wrote - it must bother you cause you wrote a book. Anyway, I forgot to tell you in that "chick flick" '27 Dresses' she slaps him! And then she ends up with him too! I couldn't believe it. It's gotta be the movies making the impression that its ok to hit people and it just isn't.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

I know an autistic man whose policy is to only date women on the spectrum.

I just read yours, Yiva, cause its short. I think that's wrong to just date AS women because there are good NT women too. They just have to be found. I see one everyday - when I look in the mirror.

 

[icesyckel]

I just read yours, Yiva, cause its short. I think that's wrong to just date AS women because there are good NT women too. They just have to be found. I see one everyday - when I look in the mirror.

I included a TL;DR in my last one for you

 

[Grumpy Cat]

In my case, I had women I went to grad school explain that they wanted a man to "pursue" them. I think they have watched a lot of those "chick flicks" like the one you've described, and they want to marry a man whose pursuit will offer them their own faerie tale romance story that they can tell their children and grandchildren. It sounds great. I remember pointing out to them, though, that they wouldn't enjoy being pursued by a guy in whom they had no interest. They of course disagreed along the lines of "every guy has his merits," and "it takes time to get to know someone," implying that they might not like a guy but might come to like him as he continues his dogged pursuit over their feigned objections.

This seemed silly to me at the time, and it still seems silly to me now, but this was a large group of girls I befriended in grad school who all were reasonably nice girls. Other than having silly notions of dating and relationships born out of watching too many black and white romance films from the 40s and 50s, they were fairly normal, well-mannered ladies. I suppose they are entitled to want what they want.

But what they want is confusing for guys like me, because the majority of women on this forum have agreed that when a girl says "no" to a date, the guy should do anything but continue pursuing a date. Basically, I have encountered two sets of women (those here and those with whom I went to school) who have offered completely opposing sets of rules on this subject. As an aspie, I need a rule set to date.

Suffice it to say, I am happy that I am married, but for some reason I still think about this contradiction in data a lot. If my wife predeceases or leaves me, and if I ever have to start dating again, then I might just not bother. It's too difficult to get consistent rules, and most women seem to speak in absolutes.

For example, everyone here has made it clear that once a girl turns a guy down for a date, he is to stop asking/pursuing or risk jail, a restraining order, etc. However, other girls have told me they never agree to the first invitation and sometimes only relent after the guy goes to ridiculous lengths to "win them over." As men, especially men on the spectrum, how are we to know which category a prospective lady falls in? Either we follow the rules of the former category, and offend the latter, or we do the latter and offend the former. Are girls who wish to be "pursued" not entitled to that? By contrast, I am certain that ladies who wish to be left alone after the first refusal/rejection are entitled to be left alone.

If you ask any given woman the answer, then you will usually get a firm response, but if you ask another, then you may get an equally firm but totally opposite response. Those men (and probably women too - though I obviously cannot speak from experience) who rely on establishing social rules/protocols as a coping mechanism for ASD are in a unenviable position, getting back to my original point about dating and flirting.

This issue continues to bother me b/c I know it continues to cause difficulties for even the NT guys I know. The bottom line is that the two responses that I've gotten from different women cannot be reconciled. There is no "middle ground." Either you cease pursuit or you don't. You can't really half-stop something.

1) "For example, everyone here has made it clear that once a girl turns a guy down for a date, he is to stop asking/pursuing or risk jail, a restraining order, etc. However, other girls have told me they never agree to the first invitation and sometimes only relent after the guy goes to ridiculous lengths to "win them over." As men, especially men on the spectrum, how are we to know which category a prospective lady falls in? Either we follow the rules of the former category, and offend the latter, or we do the latter and offend the former. Are girls who wish to be "pursued" not entitled to that? By contrast, I am certain that ladies who wish to be left alone after the first refusal/rejection are entitled to be left alone."

A man needs to think about himself first. Why are you worried about offending the latter category? Aren't Aspies wanting straight forward communication? To me, the latter category is playing a game that could get a guy in trouble. It's actually quite simple - follow the rules of the former category and a guy will stay "safe"; likewise, follow the rules of the latter playing their "games" and you may just have to pay some consequences. (Playing with fire can be quite intriguing, but it can also get out of hand.)

 

[Ste11aeres]

1) "For example, everyone here has made it clear that once a girl turns a guy down for a date, he is to stop asking/pursuing or risk jail, a restraining order, etc. However, other girls have told me they never agree to the first invitation and sometimes only relent after the guy goes to ridiculous lengths to "win them over." As men, especially men on the spectrum, how are we to know which category a prospective lady falls in? Either we follow the rules of the former category, and offend the latter, or we do the latter and offend the former. Are girls who wish to be "pursued" not entitled to that? By contrast, I am certain that ladies who wish to be left alone after the first refusal/rejection are entitled to be left alone."

A man needs to think about himself first. Why are you worried about offending the latter category? Aren't Aspies wanting straight forward communication? To me, the latter category is playing a game that could get a guy in trouble. It's actually quite simple - follow the rules of the former category and a guy will stay "safe"; likewise, follow the rules of the latter playing their "games" and you may just have to pay some consequences. (Playing with fire can be quite intriguing, but it can also get out of hand.)

IMO, if I were a guy, I wouldn't want to be with one of those girls who is so much into playing games.

 

[icesyckel]

1) A man needs to think about himself first.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that.

Why are you worried about offending the latter category?

Why is anyone worried about offending anyone? "Worry" is not the right word anyway. In truth, most people I meet are either NT or at least are not on the spectrum. My whole life is spent trying not to offend so-called "normal" people, not b/c I really care how they feel but because it makes my life easier/better not to have people unnecessarily pissed off with me.

I could take the "rebel" path some on the spectrum take. Rather than try and "blend in" or "conform" I could fight everyone and everything different from me and try to expose it as stupid or wrong.. That is a legitimate choice before me, but it is futile. You can't fight everyone, so you pick and choose battles.

You assume the "latter category" is filled with women who are somehow undesirable. However, apart from being daft in this one area, most of them were good friends - friends I had/have only because I actively worked not to inadvertently offend them as I am so prone to do. These weren't evil or stupid women. They were all intelligent grad students who would drop by to watch "Alias" some nights with me and my roomies. They were fun. People can be wrong in their thinking on certain things and still be worthy of friendship or possibly something more. It's not so simple as all that black and white. I disagree with my wife on numerous points, but I do try like mad not to offend her. Trust me, you can't possibly be happily married without seeing the wisdom in what I am saying here on at least some level.

Aren't Aspies wanting straight forward communication?

Can't speak for all of us, but for this one... hell yes.

To me, the latter category is playing a game that could get a guy in trouble.

At last you and I are having the same conversation: this could get a guy into SERIOUS trouble. However, where we differ is your assumption that the danger is inherently not worth taking. Some of the women in the "latter category" I still hold in very high esteem. They might've been worth the risk, but not for someone like me. I didn't know I had AS at the time, but I knew I was different enough not to take the risks.

There was one attempt I make, and it didn't work (turned out for the best really). I made the effort to pursue despite an initial refusal, and I did get a date (it was actually in Paris during a study trip - you could just barely see the Eiffel Tower in the distance from our table), and it didn't work. Why? Because that faerie tale nonsense is BS. She was just confused about she wanted. She married one of my distant friends, who is possibly the most boring guy I know, had kids, and then she gained about a hundred pounds. They are happy. I met someone else, got married, and I am happy. I don't regret any of it, and I don't think she does either, but we never spoke of it again after. I was upset in the beginning, and I think she was too, but it is kind of a good story to hear from beginning to end. Would make a great sappy black and white movie. That said, today I could go to jail for my part in it. Of course, she did say she liked to be pursued before I engaged. So confusing. Glad I married my wife instead. She is sweet to give everything to me straight.

It's actually quite simple - follow the rules of the former category and a guy will stay "safe"; likewise, follow the rules of the latter playing their "games" and you may just have to pay some consequences. (Playing with fire can be quite intriguing, but it can also get out of hand.)

You'll get no argument from me there. You are right on all counts.

 

[Judge]

However, other girls have told me they never agree to the first invitation and sometimes only relent after the guy goes to ridiculous lengths to "win them over." As men, especially men on the spectrum, how are we to know which category a prospective lady falls in?

It wouldn't matter whether I knew what "kind of woman" she is or not under such circumstances.

If she says or implies "no" to me and I clearly understand it, I'm gone. Period.

"But WAIT! It was just a game...I like you." - Now I'm REALLY gone. I'm not wired to react any differently.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that.



Why is anyone worried about offending anyone? "Worry" is not the right word anyway. In truth, most people I meet are either NT or at least are not on the spectrum. My whole life is spent trying not to offend so-called "normal" people, not b/c I really care how they feel but because it makes my life easier/better not to have people unnecessarily pissed off with me.

I could take the "rebel" path some on the spectrum take. Rather than try and "blend in" or "conform" I could fight everyone and everything different from me and try to expose it as stupid or wrong.. That is a legitimate choice before me, but it is futile. You can't fight everyone, so you pick and choose battles.

You assume the "latter category" is filled with women who are somehow undesirable. However, apart from being daft in this one area, most of them were good friends - friends I had/have only because I actively worked not to inadvertently offend them as I am so prone to do. These weren't evil or stupid women. They were all intelligent grad students who would drop by to watch "Alias" some nights with me and my roomies. They were fun. People can be wrong in their thinking on certain things and still be worthy of friendship or possibly something more. It's not so simple as all that black and white. I disagree with my wife on numerous points, but I do try like mad not to offend her. Trust me, you can't possibly be happily married without seeing the wisdom in what I am saying here on at least some level.



Can't speak for all of us, but for this one... hell yes.



At last you and I are having the same conversation: this could get a guy into SERIOUS trouble. However, where we differ is your assumption that the danger is inherently not worth taking. Some of the women in the "latter category" I still hold in very high esteem. They might've been worth the risk, but not for someone like me. I didn't know I had AS at the time, but I knew I was different enough not to take the risks.

There was one attempt I make, and it didn't work (turned out for the best really). I made the effort to pursue despite an initial refusal, and I did get a date (it was actually in Paris during a study trip - you could just barely see the Eiffel Tower in the distance from our table), and it didn't work. Why? Because that faerie tale nonsense is BS. She was just confused about she wanted. She married one of my distant friends, who is possibly the most boring guy I know, had kids, and then she gained about a hundred pounds. They are happy. I met someone else, got married, and I am happy. I don't regret any of it, and I don't think she does either, but we never spoke of it again after. I was upset in the beginning, and I think she was too, but it is kind of a good story to hear from beginning to end. Would make a great sappy black and white movie. That said, today I could go to jail for my part in it. Of course, she did say she liked to be pursued before I engaged. So confusing. Glad I married my wife instead. She is sweet to give everything to me straight.



You'll get no argument from me there. You are right on all counts.

Ok. I'm going to have to be more direct here. If I come across the wrong way, I apologize in advance.
I think we're getting totally off topic when we start talking about the subject of "friends". I'm trying to stay on the topic of when someone is asking someone out on a date for the first time.

When you first ask a woman out, you usually don't know her so who cares if you offend her. When I say a guy should "think of himself first" I mean that you shouldn't have to take any "risks" when asking someone out for a date. You mention the women in the "latter group" as being good friends, but they aren't in the beginning when you first ask them out. If you are friends with a woman and then ask her out, then she should respectfully decline without slapping you and playing hard to get.

Then you say that some of the women in the "latter category" may be worth the risk. The familiar saying goes "You make your own bed so lie in it". If a guy wants to take the risk, then he better be able to take the heat or get out of the kitchen and not gripe about any "consequences" he gets in the end.

One other thing, I didn't assume the women in the "latter group" were undesirable, just that they were playing a game that really isn't to their benefit. They may very well have been "intelligent grad students", but just because they are book smart doesn't mean they are smart in every other aspect of life.

 

[icesyckel]

Ok. I'm going to have to be more direct here. If I come across the wrong way, I apologize in advance.

No concerns there. By all means - be direct.

I think we're getting totally off topic when we start talking about the subject of "friends". I'm trying to stay on the topic of when someone is asking someone out on a date for the first time. When you first ask a woman out, you usually don't know her so who cares if you offend her.

Ahh, well, that may be where we got off the rails. The girls in the "pro-pursuit" category were all friends, which was how I found myself discussing it with them. I actually took the side that the whole "pursuit" notion was silly, much as you and others have, and I ended up offending (maybe just annoying?) one or two of them. However, I did try this approach with one of them, as previously alluded to, despite my better judgment/preference for directness.

When I say a guy should "think of himself first" I mean that you shouldn't have to take any "risks" when asking someone out for a date.

Wouldn't it be nice if that was the case? There are always risks, but I am supporing you mean that there should be no "legal risks?"

You mention the women in the "latter group" as being good friends, but they aren't in the beginning when you first ask them out. If you are friends with a woman and then ask her out, then she should respectfully decline without slapping you and playing hard to get.

"Should" is an interesting word. I agree with you that a friend "should" act this way. However, I don't think this was the norm in my experience, which was why I have always been so paranoid about dating female friends. It is fraught with risks, though not necessarily legal ones.

Then you say that some of the women in the "latter category" may be worth the risk. The familiar saying goes "You make your own bed so lie in it". If a guy wants to take the risk, then he better be able to take the heat or get out of the kitchen and not gripe about any "consequences" he gets in the end.

Perhaps you're right. I actually knew in this situation that this group of female friends shared a notion of dating that was sort of like a romanticized version of playing hard to get. It was a pervasive, almost medieval view I didn't care for in the area where I was living at the time. I didn't like it, but if I was going to date any of my female friends at the time, then I had to accept it. Eventually, I graduated, moved several states away, and... problem solved. It is worth noting that only one of them ever slapped me, and I never actually dated her. She slapped me for joke I made about Monica Lewinsky. You'd have been proud of my response.

One other thing, I didn't assume the women in the "latter group" were undesirable, just that they were playing a game that really isn't to their benefit. They may very well have been "intelligent grad students", but just because they are book smart doesn't mean they are smart in every other aspect of life.

On this point we are in full agreement. Sometimes you have to accept the good with the bad, but I do think this sort of approach to faerie tale dating is outdated and dumb. However, when the girl you like thinks that way about dating, you only have so many options.[/QUOTE]

 

[Randomperson]

Flirting. I do not understand this concept at all. Usually I can at least figure out an appropriate or neutral response to things that people say, but I can not figure out the appropriate response to flirting. There are a lot of non-literal statements involved in flirting, and these are hard enough to figure out, but there are also a lot of suggestive sentences. In my experience, there are three responses I can give to men who want to flirt with me: 1. I can be blunt and tell them I have no interest in flirting with them. This gets me labeled as an uptight prude. 2. I say something that sounds perfectly logical to me, and they laugh. I don't understand what's funny and they laugh more at my confusion. 3. I try to flirt back and show interest, and the level of intensity of the flirtation escalates too quickly for me to deal with. That's very uncomfortable so I usually just walk away or say something to shut it down (back to response number 1).

Ugh. Human courtship behaviors are stupid.

How do you deal with this?

Agreed, nearly all human behaviors are hopelessly stupid. But if it makes you feel any better, I have absolutely zero understanding of flirting what so ever, so you are far better at it then I would be.