There’s an important rule when it comes to self-improvement, especially when it comes to dating: some things can only be learned from experience. It’s easy to get caught up in dogmatic rules, but time and experience can teach you when exceptions arise. For example: I’m a big believer in the efficient use of one’s time and energy in dating. If someone rejects you, the best thing you can do is just shrug your shoulders and move on. But sometimes, a little persistence can mean the difference between getting the brush-off and getting the date… or more.
Being able to recognize those moments – and how to take advantage of them – however, can be tricky. Sometimes you need an experienced hand to point them out. Which is why it’s time to put my dating life back on the table with another Anatomy Lesson.
I cover a lot of topics, ranging from how to avoid being creepy by accident, what it takes to strike up a conversation with complete strangers and why playing the long game can give you better odds than hoping for instant, immediate attraction. But sometimes it can be hard to see how these all fit together. This is why one of the things I like to do here at Paging Dr. NerdLove is break down real-life examples of dating and mating to explain what went wrong, what went right and what we can learn from them.
As always: names and certain details have been changed to protect the innocent and guilty alike.
Now before we get started: this example happened while I was still pretty deep in the pick-up scene. There’re some aspects to how this went down that I’m not not proud of – not the least of which being that I was trying to get someone to cheat on her boyfriend. That was pretty scummy of me at the time. With that having been said, there is a lot to learn from this and the boyfriend issue was a part of it. So stick with me and all will be made clear.
With that being said: let’s talk a little about the saga of Lady Jay and why a little smart persistence can go a long way.
The Setup
Back in my PUA days, I’d been developing a pattern for my nights out downtown. My friends and I would meet up at one bar for what we’d call our “warm ups” – low-investment approaches early in the night to get us into a more social mood before heading out for more looking for more “serious” prospects.
As a general rule, the nightlife in Austin would start around 10 PM and slowly build until reaching a crescendo around 1 AM. Since most people you’d meet early in the evening would only just be starting out, you wanted to conserve your energy. Certain bars were for early in the evening when things were more chill and we were only trying for numbers. Other bars were for later in the evening, when the higher energy and later hours meant that they would likely be more interested in hooking up that night. The general assumption was that you might want to circle back around to someone you met earlier, but the majority of your focus should be on the women you meet later on.
Of course, all that went out the window when I ran into one of the hottest women I’d ever met at our warm-up spot.
Analysis
Warm-ups are actually an important part of meeting people. Just as you don’t want to start running a 5k cold, you don’t want to start a social night out in a solitary headspace. It can be hard to shift into that social mode and leave you feeling anxious and out of place. This is one of the reasons why it’s good to go out with friends whenever possible; meeting up with them beforehand helps you get into a more talkative and outgoing mood.
Even if you’re going to be rolling solo or meeting up with your friends later, you can still warm up beforehand. Talking to friends on the phone (actually talking, not just texting) is a great way to stretch those social muscles before a party. Failing that, starting low-investment conversations with people around you – talking briefly with the waitress at dinner, for example – can help you warm up and get ready to meet people.
Also important: developing a feel for the energy levels of the people around you. Parties and social gatherings tend to follow a waveform pattern. The earlier you are, the more stand-offish and low energy people tend to be; they’re usually less likely to be receptive to more than basic conversation. People tend to loosen up and get more excited and energetic as the night goes on, peaking an hour or two before things close down for the night.
The Approach
She had come in with a few friends who had headed straight to the bar, leaving her standing over by a table, checking her phone. Lady Jay was stunning to say the least. A little older than me1 but dressed to impress with a blue sparkly number that showed off an ass like damn and breasts like phwoar.
There was no way I was not talking to her, warm up or not. I had a couple drinks in me at that point and was feeling cocky, so I decided to go with a slightly more aggressive2 approach than normal because… well, to be perfectly honest, I thought I didn’t have a chance so fuck it.
“So is he in a lot of trouble?” I asked, nodding at her phone.
“Who?” she replied.
“The guy you’re texting who’s clearly late.”
She smirked at me. “Who says I’m texting a guy?”
I blinked. “Well if you’re texting a girlfriend, I’m going to be walking away from this very disappointed…” I replied. Mentally, I kicked myself. It was not my smoothest moment.
She dropped the phone back into her purse. “Be honest. You didn’t come over here just to ask me who I was texting,” she said, giving me a challenging stare.
At this point in my development, I’d met very few women who were willing to sass me back right off the opener; most of the women I met in bars either would reject me right off or tended to be much more indirect. This was the first time I’d run into someone who was willing to straight-up call me out on what I was doing.
It was simultaneously the hottest and most intimidating thing she could’ve done and it completely threw me off my game.
PUA protocol at this point would be to shoot back with something snarky in order to take back control of the conversation. I, on the other hand, was so surprised that blurted out “OK, fine. I thought you were smoking hot and I really wanted to meet you.”
She laughed. “See, now you’re actually interesting,” she said, holding out her hand as though she were expecting me to kiss it. “I’m Jay.”
“And I’m thinking you should have a drink with me,” I said – desperately trying to regain my mental footing. This, in fact, would define most of our conversation that night – her managing to keep me off-balance by continually giving me unexpected levels of playful shit, followed by surprisingly deep conversation, punctuated by more teasing. I liked someone who could banter with me, but I hadn’t met anyone who managed to upend my expectations. She refused my offer of a drink but did sit with me instead. If it wasn’t for the fact that she kept touching me – a brush on the arm, a nudge with her foot – and playing with her hair as we talked, I would’ve been convinced that she didn’t like me much. Eventually I managed to start zinging back, which made her laugh and lean in. It seemed like a natural moment for a kiss, so I moved in… and got the push-back via a finger on the lips.
“I don’t think my boyfriend would approve,” she said with a grin.
“…you waited until now to tell me you had a boyfriend?” I replied; if I knew I wasn’t going to have a chance with her, I wouldn’t have spent so much time flirting.
“What can I say? I was having too much fun talking to you. You’re interesting.”
As she stood up to leave, she turned and looked at me over her shoulder. “Maybe I’ll see you around some time.”
I had never been so confused in my life. And I was absolutely determined to have her.
Analysis
I probably learned more about flirting from Lady Jay than I did from almost anyone. She was the epitome of the push-pull dynamic – drawing in with a compliment then taking it back with a tease. It made her difficult to read and maddeningly hot. It wasn’t until I could match the same rhythm that she warmed up to me, and even then it was clear that I was playing catch up. Keeping someone slightly uncertain can actually increase their appeal – sexual tension, after all, is thwarted desire – but needs to be done carefully. Past a certain point, you’re no longer flirting so much as playing head games, which nobody likes.
The Second Encounter
It was sheer coincidence that I ran into Jay a second time. This time we ended up meeting at a club across the street from the warm-up bar; it was a favorite of ours because we’d gotten to know the bouncers and were able to skip the line. I made my traditional beeline to the bar when I felt a tap on my shoulder.
“Hey, Mister Pick-Up Line,” she said with a grin.
I gave her a mock-stern look. “Hey Trouble,” I replied. She pouted at me.
“How’m I trouble when I’m so nice?”
“Because you’re the one who’s going to get me in trouble if you keep looking at me like that.”
She laughed and punched me in the shoulder. I offered to buy her a drink, but she shook her head. “I’ve got my own,” she said. When I arched an eyebrow at her, she reached into her purse an wiggled a flask at me. “I like keeping track of how much I’ve had. Plus, they never have what I like here.”
“What do you have in there?” I asked, my curiosity piqued.
“Tequila” she said winking. I snorted. “What, you don’t like tequila?” she said, almost affronted.
“Oh no, I used to love tequila shots. Then, y’know, I learned I could get good alcohol.”
“That’s because you’ve never had the good stuff,” she said with a sniff. She hooked my arm with hers. “Come with me,” she said, pulling me over into a corner. “If they catch us, we’re going to get kicked out of here.”
We huddled up near the booths as she passed me the flask. “Don’t shoot this. Sip it.”
It was my first time with straight tequila… and it was damn good. We stayed there for a good 15 minutes, passing the flask back and forth like teenagers at prom. I put my arm around her waist and she leaned in with me… but again, gave me the finger to the lips when I moved to kiss her. “Boyfriend, remember?”
“I don’t see him anywhere, do you?” I said. She shook her head.
“Doesn’t matter. Still exists.”
“You’re the one who pulled me into the corner,” I responded. She grinned.
“I didn’t say I didn’t like you. I said I had a boyfriend.”
That night we exchanged numbers; I joked that as long as she was going to be stalking me, I should be able to tell her where I was to make it easier on her. Later that night, I sent her a text: “Hey Trouble. Just so you know, I’m going to keep hitting on you.”
Five seconds later, she wrote back: “Well you’re certainly welcome to try.”
Analysis
This is where things started to get interesting. On the one hand, she was dating someone and wasn’t interested in cheating on him. On the other hand, she also was making it clear that she liked me… and was dropping considerable hints that hooking up wasn’t entirely out of the realm of possibility. Again, the push-pull aspect of our interaction was keeping me interested.
A lot of people would say that she was just trying to keep me on the line because she liked the attention, which is entirely possible. And to be honest, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing as long as everybody is on board. However, her behavior – approaching me instead of waiting to be approached, giving me her number – speaks far more to genuine interest than manipulation. Similarly, the moments of intimacy – pulling me into the corner, standing in close and sharing the flask – implied a deeper interest than just appreciating being hit on by a younger guy.
Most importantly, however, was that I’d been given explicit permission to keep flirting with her. This is the point where persistence comes in to play; she likes flirting with me, which only gives me more opportunities to win her over. At this point in my development, I had been quite successful, so I was confident that time was decidedly on my side. The key is to be careful not to cross the line. That’s the hidden meaning behind “welcome to try.” If I played things wrong – by being too persistent, getting needy, entitled or pushing things to the point that they weren’t fun any more, then I was going to get cut off.
Finding The Equilibrium
I spent the next several months (yes, months) walking a line with Lady Jay. On the one hand, all signs pointed to the fact that she liked me. On the other hand: boyfriend. I wasn’t so concerned about the boyfriend – as far as I was concerned, he was a temporary roadblock to what I wanted. The key – or so I thought – was going to be getting Jay’s attraction level high enough that it would override the existence of the boyfriend. At the same time: well, I wasn’t going to stick around waiting for her. Not when there were other women to hook up with. So it was a matter of keeping contact open and maximizing my time with her, but not giving signs that I was getting needy.
I knew from experience that more sexual flirting made actual sex more likely – but I couldn’t just come out and say “I want to fuck you”. There needed to be a more playful aspect to it – something fun to draw her in but also not tip my hand. She knew I wanted to bang her. I knew I wanted to bang her. But our entire relationship was based on the banter and dance of sexual frustration. The answer: texting. Texting made for perfect flirting territory. It was a way of keeping lines of communication open without being too pushy, and people tend to be more willing to be sexual via text than they would be over the phone or in person. So I would occasionally send bait texts: “Hey, I had the craziest dream about you last night. So I just wanted to say ‘hey’ and also ‘stay out of my dreams’. You make it hard to concentrate.” She’d send back “Aww, but I like you dreaming about me.” Another time I sent “Hey, just saw your evil twin.”
She wrote back “No, you saw the good one.”
“What makes you so sure?”
“Because everyone knows bad girls are hotter.”
If I was out and about downtown, I’d make a point of texting her to see if she was around and wanted to meet up. If she was downtown already, she’d usually meet up with me – at least for a little while. We’d banter, we’d flirt, I’d pull her in close… but that was as far as it ever got. It seemed like a battle of inches; she was fine with my putting my arm around her. She was cool leaning in against me in intimate space… but never anything further. It was maddening in its own way; I could tell she was in to me… but I could never quite get it over the last hump (as it were).
On the plus side, however, I was developing an appreciation for fine tequila.
Of course, I inevitably screwed myself.
There were plenty of times when we’d run into each other at various bars or clubs by legitimate coincidence.
We’d talk and flirt, but then I’d move on and flirt with other people. There were a few memorable occasions where other girls I’d been seeing would come by and I’d end up making out with them in front of Jay.
And then I pushed things too far. On one occasion, I ran into Lady Jay at a club with her friends. As I came up to say hi, she waved me off. Confused, I went back to my friends. A bit later, she came up. “Sorry, that’s my boyfriend over there,” she said, gesturing at a guy by the bar.
I was aghast. This was my competition? He looked like the lead singer of White Lion after a lengthy prison stay. I couldn’t believe that I was being functionally cockblocked by someone who looked like he was in a Jackyl-with-a-Y cover band… and said so. “So… does he ever tell you about the days he opened for Winger?” I asked, getting a chilly smile in return. “No, seriously. Can you ask him to come over here and do ‘When the Children Cry?'” From that point on, when I ran into Lady Jay, I’d make a joke about her boyfriend.
That was a mistake.
“So… did he win you over with his rendition of ‘More Than Words’?”3 I asked once. And that turned out to be once to many.
“You know what? I’ve got to go,” she said. She turned and walked off without another word, leaving me with my metaphorical dick in my hand and the vague feeling that I’d just irreparably fucked myself.
Analysis
First and foremost: my persistence was not only welcome but working. Jay was very responsive; even if she had no intentions of dumping her boyfriend, she was enjoying my presence in her life. It’s a situation that requires being socially well-calibrated and aware of how other people are behaving; it’s easy to go from “welcome persistence” to “annoying nuisance” to “dear god why is this person not getting the fucking HINT!” If I’d started getting pushback or detecting signs of The Fade4 I’d have bailed.
Next: this was a master class in how to do things right and wrong… occasionally at the same time. On the one hand, flirting with Jay via text was good. Not only did it help keep her aware of me, but it was easier to escalate sexually than it would have been in person. Text, to many people, just isn’t as “real” as talking on the phone and they’re more willing to go further. It also helped keep a barometer on how she felt about me. I spent more time initiating the texting, but she almost always responded quickly and enthusiastically, rather than with increasingly short replies.
On the other hand, insulting her boyfriend was a stupid, stupid move. To start with: it was just plain mean. Our flirting was fun as long as it was light and fluffy; the occasional mention of the vague obstacle entitled “boyfriend” was a part of the game. Talking about her boyfriend the person made it personal and dickish. Plus: not only did it make me look petty and immature – not exactly appealing traits in a man – but it also insulted Jay. After all, by mocking her boyfriend, I was mocking her taste in men. What does it say about what I think of her if I think her boyfriend is such a jackass? There’s a lot in PUA circles about “boyfriend destroyers” – mythical scripts or patterns that can diminish a boyfriend in his girlfriend’s eyes and make you that much more appealing. They’re bullshit. Bringing her boyfriend into it only made things worse.
Chasing other women, especially in front of her, didn’t help. It certainly didn’t necessarily hurt, but the biggest benefit was that I was still seeing other people instead of just pining after Jay. It didn’t magically make her jealous or somehow make her want me more. At best, she knew I wasn’t obsessing about her. At worst… well, it was basically neutral.
The Close
I was fairly convinced that I’d completely blown things with Lady Jay after the last incident. I tried apologizing – sincerely, even – but got nothing back. In fact, she didn’t respond to my texts for weeks afterwards. I hadn’t seen her downtown, either. It seemed that I’d pushed my luck too far and it had finally run out. I was surprisingly saddened by this; yeah, I wanted to sleep with her, not date her, but I’d really enjoyed our bantering and duel of wits. I was finding that I missed the back-and-forth teasing about who was trying to get into whose pants. Trying to get her in bed had been the project of six months at this point and it seemed almost a shame that it ended this way.
One night about a month later, several of my friends and I were planning a party at a local club – getting bottle service, reserving a significant portion of the club, the works. On a whim, I texted Jay, telling her I’d be there and she should totally stop by if she was going to be around. As far as I was concerned, it was tossing an invite out into the void. So I was surprised when Jay and a friend came by and made a beeline straight for me. Evidently they’d been out for a while already and after getting my message, Jay had decided… what the hell.
It was the first time that she’d been around my buddies for any length of time. They’d heard the stories and seen me flirting with her, but it was the first time she actually talked with any of them. I headed to the bar for tequila shots, handed one to Jay and said “Come with me, we’re dancing.” This was going to be my last-ditch effort to move things along; a little bump and grind on the dance floor to get excited and then… well, who knows? And it looked like it was going to work; as soon as we hit the dance floor, Jay was all over me like a cheap suit. We weren’t making out, but I was damn near getting humped straight into the ground as she was sliding my hands all sorts of interesting places. After what seemed to be too long and not nearly long enough at the same time, Jay mentioned that she had to go. I thought I was in like Flynn and offered to walk her to her car – conveniently parked in the garage across the street.
Standing by the car door, time began to slow down. We were both out of breath, yet breathing in synch. I put my hands on her waist and pulled her close. As she melted into me, our faces came closer and closer together, ever so slowly as the tension began to build…
And I got a finger to the lips. “Not yet,” she whispered. “I still have a boyfriend.”
Analysis
The magic words there? “Not yet.” Not, “no”. This wasn’t a refusal, this was a “need more time” – although I didn’t realize it at the time. More than anything else, persistence requires patience.
The smartest move I made was simply apologizing. Jay took her time in forgiving me, but the fact that I recognized the mistake and made a sincere apology for being an asshat earned a lot of good will back. If I hadn’t, she wouldn’t have spoken to me again afterwards.
The party also ended up working to my benefit. Having my friends talk me up to her helped solidify me as a cool guy – although this would’ve been more valuable earlier on. The biggest benefit, however, was the dancing. Humans are bad at recognizing how we feel; we feel the symptoms and ascribe causes to them later. It’s known as misattribution of arousal, and when done right, it works to your advantage. Anything that gets the heart-rate up increases sexual arousal because we tend to associate the feeling with a person rather than an event. The dancing got her hot and bothered – especially after seven months of flirting and building tension. All that we lacked at this point was for Jay to give herself permission – as it were – for the release.
The Payoff
A week later, I got a text. “I don’t have a boyfriend any more. So where’re you taking me tomorrow night?”
Later – much later – as we were cooling off in the afterglow and feeling the air tracing patterns over our skin, I turned to her and said “So… what made you decide that you were going to sleep with me?”
She yawned and stretched, sat up and began to collect her clothes.
“You didn’t give up. I liked that.”
Related Posts
- As I would later find out, she was a good ten years older, in fact. Decidedly not a bad thing… [↩]
- also: douchebaggy [↩]
- Fun fact, my brother used to be very popular in middle-school because he could play ‘More Than Words’ on guitar… [↩]
- when someone starts to become non-responsive in hopes that you’ll go away, rather than having to actually have an awkward confrontation [↩]
embertine says
Haha, no, this whole story gives me the creeps.
nonA says
I guess this is the big difference between people like you and people like me. My top priority is knowing what actually works.
Subtext, as always, is important. What works at the bar doesn’t necessarily work on the cutie in class. But someone who shows up at the meat market – who keeps showing up at the meat market – while constantly engaging, playing, and sending signals of her own is not some meek victim of PUA mind tricks.
@kleenestar says
It's cute that you think every guy who is going to take away the message "persistence -> sex" will have a single clue about subtext, or be able to read her signals of mutual interest, or even care whether she's actually interested or just can't escape. But then again, you're unlikely to have to deal with guys like that, which is certainly a big difference.
Don't paint yourself as a pragmatist when the different is contextual.
enail0_o says
Yes, this is one of those articles where I wish there was a tag for Warning: Do not attempt if you do not understand context or do not have a full mastery of reading social cues. This is not the first article that I've felt is all fine and good if you know when not to do this, but I think a fairly high percentage of his readers who would consider trying it would not have that awareness..
embertine says
This story doesn't creep me out because I think that Ms Jay is a feeble-minded victim. And you're right, what works is not priority for me as much as not getting abused. After all, lying to get people into bed works.
Marty Farley says
Outta curiosity, what specifically does creep you out?
embertine says
See below for list 😉
Bas Kleijweg says
Huh, I thought this was going to turn out that she was grooming you for a devil's threesome or something likewise.
In retrospect, you should(at least I would) have pulled out the moment she didn't want her boyfriend seeing you.
I can respect her still wanting to flirt with people. I can respect him not wanting that flirting to happen in front of him. But not even introducing you while telling you to keep the banter to a minimum just reeks of a lack of gusto and keeping it a secret from him, which is disappointing after the honest no-apologies confidence she had shown up till then.
Jessica Harley says
Why do you routinely switch between referring to her as 'Jay' and 'Lady Jay?' The fact you keep referring to her as 'Lady Jay' comes off as very Nice Guy. I get that this was during your PUA days, but was it necessary to refer to her in such a way? You couldn't have just said Jay?
Also this was a terrible article to even post because while "persistence paid off," it only reaffirms that all a man has to do is keep pushing and pushing even when a woman tells him "No, I have a boyfriend," because it might eventually pay off, as it did in your case. I understand that this was an incident that occurred in your past, but it's in pretty poor taste given the content and goals of your website as a whole. It really has no place being on a website that is normally very informative and helpful towards establishing equality and understanding between genders and simply people as a whole.
Congratulations on that sweet poontang though I guess? It's the only reason I can assume you posted it: validation for your conquest when a woman finally said "yes" after months of saying "no." You're a regular James Bond.
Dr_NerdLove says
I call her Lady Jay Because a) Lady J was a character on G.I Joe, b) which gave her an instant nickname and c) I'm a huge goddamn nerd.
Jessica Harley says
Got it.
embertine says
Jessica, that would be points 2, 3 and 4 on my list of why this article creeped me out:
(#1: Reads like PUA fanfic)
#2: Reinforces the idea that no generally doesn't mean no
#3: Blatant bragging
#4: m'ladeeeeeeeee
(#5: Only good things you can think of to say about this woman are her T&A)
Bas Kleijweg says
>appreciates her banter skills
>appreciates her taste in introducing him to good alcohol
>appreciates her confidence and spontaneity
Of course, you could also interpret all these as Harris only having an appreciation for signals that she's likely to put out. In fact, the whole story could be a Cliff's Notes of a long and unsavoury oneitis that looks like a smooth story only when abridged, with our dear Doc only remembering it through a lens of romanticized retrospect. Just enough stunts to make it adorable, smooth confidence coming from nowhere, the fuck-up and the sudden happy ending.
He tells us very little about her personality, or her motivations, or the aftermath of the hook-up. Maybe the Doc was simply a rebound and a source of validation that she could escape her relationship at any time before that.
Maybe she pitied the Doc and was learning him an object lesson on boundaries because she was afraid how he'd turn out otherwise. But maybe that's not the point. I think the lessons in it are pretty clear even if the whole thing was a fevered peyote hallucination.
Trust positive signals. Respect boundaries and nuance. Apologize for fuck-ups. Be chill about it, go for other people in the meantime. Don't see it as a verdict on your personality. It's a translation into practice of all the stuff he's been expounding in other articles.
Bwmn says
"Trust positive signals. Respect boundaries and nuance. Apologize for fuck-ups. Be chill about it, go for other people in the meantime. Don't see it as a verdict on your personality."
This is exactly it. I think the fact that this story can read a little less "meet cute" because of the fact that she had a boyfriend and that the romantic "point" of the story was a hook up dynamic and not a relationship – but the overall points I think are still fair. I think where persistence in this realm can be the most important is when you meet/try to date someone with an insane schedule for one reason or another.
I have a friend who's a foreign correspondent – and even just being his friend can be challenging because he'll cancel plans last minute (because – news) and on the flip side all of a sudden be free at odd times. So again, just in terms of being his friend requires being confident that "yes he does really like me", "when he can't meet up, it likely has very little to do with me – but rather him being tired/called away/etc", and "I should still randomly contact him/invite him because you never know". I think had this example more been a case of how to deal with someone who appears interested but also has a very involved schedule – then this kind of persistence might have been framed different. But the take away points would still be the same.
Gentleman Johnny says
Trust positive signals. Respect boundaries and nuance. Apologize for fuck-ups. Be chill about it, go for other people in the meantime. Don't see it as a verdict on your personality. It's a translation into practice of all the stuff he's been expounding in other articles.
That's much more what I got out of it. Even if they had never hooked up, they were both still having fun. Excepting the outright insulting of the boyfriend (and I'd probably take at least one crack at anyone in leopard print tights, too), Doc took every rebuff in stride. Again, he took every no as a no.In this case, there was enough interest that "no sex" was not the same as "never speak to me again". He was persistent, yes, but never past the level that she was willing to reciprocate.
@kleenestar says
I actually think this is a pretty good example of when to keep persisting – note, not pushing. What makes the example work for me is a) he's very clear that she's also interested and enthusiastic, b) she continues to show those signs until he screws up, and c) he learns that there is in fact a line that he should have respected.
What worries me is that many of the guys who read this won't have the calibration to read "She is interested" versus "She would like me to go away and die in a fire now," and will just take away the lesson of "persistence leads to sex." But I'm not sure how the Doc could be clearer about the need for mutual interest for persistence to make sense.
Jessica Harley says
It is, unfortunately, a tricky situation. I agree that when mutual interest exists, persistence is okay, but on the other hand, she also clearly said "no." But on the other, other hand, she was also actively engaged in flirting with him, both verbally, physically, and if I interpreted correctly, through text. She's just as much a dirt bag as past Doc was (sorry Doc; again, I understand you are a different person now) for engaging in such activity while in a relationship. What bothers me about the article is that she explicitly said "no," and that I share the concerns you do, which is why I don't think it's a good article to have up.
If it had been about mutual interest and persistence without the hanging fruit of "no" (and no significant others in the picture), it would have been fine. As it is, it feels like it's a contradiction to other articles he writes, and almost has an underlining message of "Go forth, be persistent. You might get a yes, but only if you do it right."
@kleenestar says
I think it's helpful to point out that the "no" was "I'm not going to kiss you," and in fact he did not kiss her until she gave him an explicit and enthusiastic yes. You can want to flirt with someone and not want it to go further, and I actually think that's a really positive message to send. She can say yes to flirting, and no to kissing, and if you respect that boundary you can still have a damn good time.
rebootI730 says
I agree. She set the terms of the interaction and DNL followed them (and seemed to be enjoying himself in the process). I thought it was an interesting story as well in that he did not oneitis on her. Sure, he wanted her, sure they flirted, but he also met other women and did not obsess. It is a good abundance mentality demo.
embertine says
That's true, reboot. It's a good example of how not to focus too much on one person, I'll agree with that.
Jessica Harley says
You're right, and I, too, agree with that, but I think the idea of smart persistence being a good thing could have been said in a better way that didn't seem to suggest that one should change the "no" into a "yes."
embertine says
Also, "You might get a yes, so persist on the off-chance, who gives a crap if you either don't notice or don't care whether you're making someone uncomfortable in the meantime." I'm very sure that's not the message the good Doc would WISH to send, but the way this is written really does sound that way to me, and I'm not even a guy looking to validate creepy behaviour.
Bwmn says
I disagree that this case comes off as creepy or uncomfortable.
What I think this example shows well is that moments of being very direct (particularly when he first got her number and told her that he would continue hitting on her) – he gave her a lot of agency. After that first period of texting she could have responded with "oops, mistake – abort abort!" or "I just want to be friends" or what she did say which heavily implied "I get what your intentions are, and at this time, I'm ok with that".
Now this kind of aggressive flirting/clubbing scene isn't for everyone and on its own can be seen as creepy or uncomfortable for some. But I don't think that this scene is creepy at all.
What I do think is crucial in the realm of persistence is the fact that you're not strictly pursuing one person that long. Because then there really is no way to not avoid getting overly invested.
etherealclarity says
"She's just as much a dirt bag as past Doc was (sorry Doc; again, I understand you are a different person now) for engaging in such activity while in a relationship."
I'm not sure I agree with this, because we don't know the terms or context of her relationship. She obviously wasn't in an open relationship, because it seems clear that she was interested and it was the relationship that was stopping her. On the other hand, the lines of what is acceptable behavior while in a relationship differ from relationship to relationship. Some people really enjoy having their significant others tease other people and bring that energy back to the relationship with them. It is entirely possible that Jay's behavior was on the up and up.
Jessica Harley says
You're right, I take that comment back.
Beth says
Yes, exactly. I've known couples where one person liked the energy of bars, or clubs, or other gatherings, and the other person did not; they often had very clear, specific rules about what was and wasn't okay (for example, flirting great, hugging fine, snuggling okay, kissing completely off-limits). Some couples shared all the details, some shared nothing. Most of them recalibrated frequently.
Gentleman Johnny says
The thing is, she said no sex. Fine. Both of them seem to have been having a fun time flirting even with sex off the table. At no point is Doc frustrated because she won't give in. He's playing, she's playing back and if nothing ever comes of it that's fine. "She showed up at the party for a bit then went home" doesn't make a good story, though. When someone who has said no but has been enjoying flirting with you calls up and says "I don't have a boyfriend anymore", that's a "yes".
Trixnix says
@GJ.
Yes, she said no to sex. She enjoyed flirting with Dr Nerdlove. She's playing him a lot more than he's playing her but I'm sure it was fun. The point here is: her reason for not having sex is she has a boyfriend. Which is cool and everything. People can decline sex after flirting. Boundaries and all. But if she has this boyfriend and he is so important to her then why is she out flirting with random dudes she meets at a bar?
Why is she not with her boyfriend flirting with him? The guy she chose to be in a relationship with.
It's not the potential for nothing to come of this that makes it bad. It's how toxic it is. She is pretty darn toxic all the way through. This is what she thinks of her boyfriend? This is the respect she gives him? Flirting with random dudes in a bar for fun? Yeah, classy woman.
Now, this is a long time ago and both her and Dr Nerdlove's behaviour may well have changed. We're all young once and do stupid stuff. I've danced in such toxic circles myself and messed up too. It's just fair to point out how toxic a lot of this is. Is this woman unaware that flirting with Dr Nerdlove might give him the impression she is up for sex? Especially as she continues to do this flirting despite stating she has a boyfriend. Almost tempting him to cross boundaries she herself pretends to have and respect.
If you have boundaries, don't continuously tempt others to cross them. That's massively emotionally manipulative.
eselle28 says
You would not like to be in this relationship. I wouldn't like to be in it, either. But there are healthy, respectful relationships where people agree that they can both flirt with others, but where sex and kissing are off limits. In others, people can flirt and kiss and touch, but can't do anything that involves body fluid. Openness is a spectrum, and I think you're being judgmental of people who don't want either one extreme or the other – and I don't see why that would be. Why force those people into a relationship mold they don't want, making them and their unflirty partners miserable, rather than encouraging them to find people who are similar?
There are also a lot of relationships that aren't open for flirting where people aren't expected to be and wouldn't want to be glued at the hip. Your question of, "Why is she not with her boyfriend?" can be asked of anyone who wants to have interests or friendships outside of their partnership, and the answer is that a romantic relationship doesn't fulfill every need for every person.
Nerdlove knows what her boundaries are because she told him. She's not pretending to have boundaries. She has them – very firm ones. She's up for flirting, but not for kissing or sex. You may not like what her boundaries are, but that's not an invitation to cross them. This, by the way, is a very dangerous line of thought, and I'm making a frowny face at my computer right now because I'm surprised it's coming from you.
rebootI730 says
I agree and am giving Trixnix a major side eye too. She had very clearly communicated, very firm boundaries and it was up to DNL to decide if he wanted the type of relationship she offered. He seemed to have enjoyed the banter and flirting quite a bit. If he had not, he would have stopped contacting her.
enail0_o says
Lots of yes to this.
And more personally, as someone who is not much into casual flirting or game-playing, the fact that she explicitly communicates her genuine boundaries makes it seem much less manipulative – she's playing games, but she's upfront about the fact that she would like to play games with him and what kind of games she is up for playing. Best practice casual flirting!
@kleenestar says
Flirting with someone and saying "But I am not up for sex" is in NO WAY giving a false impression. That is in fact giving a very accurate impression.
Similarly, flirting with guys in a bar is 100% not disrespectful if her boyfriend knows about it and has no problem with it.
Just because people have preferences that don't match yours doesn't make them toxic or disrespectful. In fact it's pretty disrespectful to assume that people can't be ethical while making different choices from you.
Gentleman Johnny says
I guess my answer in this situation is "not my business, its not her boyfriend I'm flirting with". Now I don't seriously pursue people who are in relationships anymore and I don't let them seriously pursue me but even if I' just messing around, her relationship with her boyfriend is her responsibility, not mine. I don't really see how this is tempting him to cross boundaries, her "no" is firm, they both know where the line is.
LeeEsq says
I don’t buy this at all.
Persistence and playing the long game might pay off but I see no need why I should have to be put through an emotional roller-coaster and feel that I’m getting yanked along in order to get anywhere. If a woman likes me and likes my attention than I expect it to be reciprocated sooner than latter. Having to jump through hoops for months is something that I don’t have the time for anymore. It’s like receiving the worst aspects of pre and post sexual revolution dating.
embertine says
I agree, Lee. If the story unrolled exactly as described (sorry, but it does sound like some EL James-style fanfic up in here), then Jay was an inveterate game-player. Not cool, no matter how phwoar her tits were.
Dr_NerdLove says
Hey! My fanfic was WAY better than EL James!(I mean, the reveal alone that the Crisis on Infinite Earths was actually the 2nd Impact and Lex Luthor took over SEELE alone was fucking AMAZING…)
embertine says
Haha, I would say get it published then, but we know that's no guarantee of quality. I always want to give you the benefit of the doubt, Doc (because I loves ya Porgy), but this article made me do the embarrassed giggle-yeuch that Merida does at the end Brave when she sees her parents kissing. I couldn't find the gif, sadface.
Marty Farley says
Sadly I could not find that one either. Take a substitute.
http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_me5p5vv91C1qcu3…
Robjection says
You wouldn't happen to know if there's a video of it would you? Because if there is, I might be able to craft a gif for youse.
Dr_NerdLove says
I'd rather wait until I can get DC and Gainax to pay me to write it in it's original glory. Because if there can be a legitimate Robotech/Voltron crossover series, then I CAN DREAM, DAMMIT.
(I mean, the moment that Zauriel is forced to duke it out with Shinji and Batman… TEARS, I'm telling you. TEARS. It's Eisner gold!)
nonA says
This is a specific case of not jetting due to an immediate setback when all the other signals are in your favor. It’s very different from trying to wear her down.
Because you’re Lee, it’s also a reminder that game and knowing how to make tension work for you are also very handy skills to have.
Marty Farley says
For the record, though, this kind of "tension" doesn't work for every woman, and those are probably the women that would be more compatible with Lee anyway. By twisting himself into the type of guy who has "game" and tension, he attracts women who respond to that…. which may not be the type of woman he would actually enjoy dating.
nonA says
There’s a difference between who we’d be compatible with in a hypothetical hippie world where looks and status didn’t matter, and who we pursue in the real world. Likewise, there’s a difference between what we want to think we respond well to, and what we actually do.
Lots of the guys here, when you look at what they actually go for, that tends to be girls who enjoy a skilled game dynamic.
eselle28 says
Eh. Fair enough. I'm more than happy for those folks to pair up in a "less for me, and thank goodness for that" kind of way.
nonA says
When it’s club girls hooking up with club boys, that’s pretty much my reaction too.
This site being what it is, though, we get a lot of nerd boys pining after hot socialite girls, and not willing to sell themselves in a way that attracts their target audience. This very much does not remove anyone from the dating pool.
(There’s also the issue of successful marketing yourself to your target audience, but that’s a little in-depth for a derail.)
LeeEsq says
For one thing, I never said that I like the hot socialite girls. I appreciate the look of many them on aesthetic grounds but not the personality that usually accompanies it. Only a handful of dates I've been have even come slightly close to the hot socialite type. Second, I don't think that the nerdy type can really sell themselves in a way to attract this audience. Having game will come across as completely artificial if it comes from me. I'm way too academic in my interests to really seem that I have game. My physical appearance isn't exactly the type associated with people with game to. Other nerds are similar. This isn't something where you can fake it till you make it. It requires a lot of suppression of your real nature and interests in order to seem real rather than fake.
eselle28 says
You realize I'm coming at this from my own standpoint, correct? If the nerd dudes in question wish to take up their adversarial banter banners and ride off to conquer hot socialite girls, I again say more power to them. Whether or not they succeed, it's not my problem and I'm glad to have them out of my dating pool. I'd just note that for those who want to date regular women around them, it's not the best approach, especially if they're annoyed at a past lack of success with socialite types.
_Johannes_ says
Totally agree. Fortunately I don't know women like Jay personally. Well, maybe I do, but I manage to avoid them. The dialogs DNL is citing here make me shudder. If a woman was holding out her hand as though she were expecting me to kiss it, I would turn around and run away. No look back. Well I actually wouldn't approach women who would do that in the first place.
If this was the only way to get to know women, I would rather resign on sex. Fortunately there are many other women around.
LeeEsq says
Having game is not an admirable trait in my opinion. Many see it as fun and games but I see it as sleazy and dishonest. You don’t tease somebody along while your in a relationship even if the relationship is ending. You end the relationship and go forward. If your single and are mutually interested than the ethical option is to respond back honestly rather than play hard to get.
Gentleman Johnny says
Then maybe it won't work for you. Jumping through hoops sucks, so this kind of thing works better for someone who can enjoy it for its own sake rather than feeling like a tiger at the circus.
enail0_o says
I don't know, feeling like a tiger at the circus makes it sound kinda fun, actually. Who doesn't love a circus? Or a tiger?!
BiSian says
I really really wanted to make "mrawr" noises after reading this. Only stopped myself because I'm in a cafe and don't want to weird out the entire room….
enail0_o says
I'm sad you didn't do it anyway 🙁
Gentleman Johnny says
My favorite circus tigers ever manged to convey boredom even as they were rearing up and roaring at the tamer. It was like "yeah, yeah, I'm fierce. Rawr. Can I have a steak now?"
eselle28 says
A feline, acting like it's above it all? Inconceivable!
enail0_o says
This post wins the internet for today!
Jenn says
[Who doesn't love a circus?]
*raises hand*
Clowns creep me out and I worry about the potential mistreatment of the animals.
Gentleman Johnny says
When I used to go to traveling circuses on a regular basis, there were always PETA types out front (I lived in Norfolk, their world HQ) with a checklist of various ways that circus animals were mistreated. More often than not we'd come back out with nothing checked. The times that we did find something, it was inevitably some operation so sketchy that you could have guessed before ever buying a ticket. Cold blooded though it may be, those animals are their livelihood. They want those animals to have a long, healthy, happy life.
LeeEsq says
The state of world politics depresses me to but besides voting there is little to be done about it.
craniest says
yeah, um… wow. Okay.
I'm just going to pretend this was Blogger Writer's Strike Week and management got some intern to cover your articles until a new labor contract gets signed.
embertine says
Cassandra Clare, maybe. I hear she's looking for work.
Marty Farley says
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7l4g0UByT1qg46…
embertine says
Did you like my ice cold burn, Marty. 😀
P.S. Your gif game has been particularly strong lately.
Marty Farley says
I did, though it triggered post traumatic memories of arguing with other fanfiction writers about whether Clare is *actually* a plagiarist and how disliking "filing off the serial numbers" really just means I hate teenage girls and don't want them to succeed as writers. (And thanks, I try.)
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lkng4iYWle1qbq83n….
Dr_NerdLove says
Honestly, I think the "filing the serial numbers off" part isn't necessarily the worst thing in the world. A lot of fanfic writers -especially AU writers – end up creating insanely elaborate worlds and set-ups that by the end have almost nothing to do with the original series it was based off of. At that point, it's pretty much just using pre-existing names and character relationships as a leaping off point, which aren't exactly copyrightable (because at a certain point you're into archetypes).
It's another entirely when you're basically lifting entire scenes from the source (Bella nearly being run down by a car vs. Anastasia being nearly run down by a bike messenger) that you start running into being too close to the source IMO)
embertine says
Or in the case of CC, lifting scenes from entirely unrelated works word-for-word and hoping no-one will notice because it's not from your core fandom canon.
Anyway, sorry for the digression into fanfic rants!
Dr_NerdLove says
The only thing I know about CC is her tangental involvement with the whole "MsScribe" dramabomb.
Well that and the movie based off The Mortal Instruments wasn't that good. Including a moment that really, REALLY wanted to be Blade.
thathat says
Didn't she also con her readers out of money at some point? Or am I getting my ten-year-old internet drama lore mixed up?
eselle28 says
I once made a really good faith effort to figure out what the whole deal with CC was, and all I can remember was word salad and confusion and headaches.
Mel_ says
She didn't con them, but she allowed readers to donate lots of money to replace items she'd had stolen, which a lot of people saw as profiting off her fan fiction (she hadn't published anything officially at that point). But that's a pretty gray area.
For anyone curious about the whole plagiarism "scandal", there's a detailed breakdown here, written by one of the main people who noticed and tried to address the issue with CC.
Marty Farley says
Yeah, it's a gray area for me as well, and I don't think it can ever be legally enforceable…. Still doesn't mean I don't give Clare's books some heavy side-eye.
Gentleman Johnny says
It was good enough for Shakespeare. Just sayin'.
Marty Farley says
So was very casual racism. You can straight up plagiarize a few year hundred years ago, but I don't see anyone suggesting that's an okay practice just because it was practiced by successful authors in the past.
Gentleman Johnny says
This is one of those things where there isn't a firm line. Watchmen has Charlton Comics characters (who had just been bought by DC) with the serial numbers filed off. Its clearly an original take (for the time) on superheroes but the characters are clearly and unsubtly "ripped off" from pre-existing ones. Its also considered one of the most important novels of the 20th Century by the New York Times.
Marty Farley says
But Watchmen is also a deconstruction of those characters, is it not? Venture Brothers blatantly rips off a whole bunch of sources, but it does so to poke fun, examine, and critically analyze (in a goofy, spoofy way) the messages and core of the characters.
That isn't what I see in a lot of the "legitimate" fanfic, though. Like Dr. NL said, there's some fanfic that just uses the universe (which I think is great), or uses beloved characters as a jumping off point for other fun adventures (also valid in a lot of circumstances, I think.) But there are others that are just blatant photocopies, or taking characters and twisting them, but not in a fun or analytic way; they're there to make money or gain fame, not to actually SAY something. Those are the ones that make me hesitate to give the entire practice the green light.
Gentleman Johnny says
I guess my question is whether or not those less creative ones actually make money. Like I said, its not a firm line because the "fanfic" is part of a continuum. For a long time, Star Wars novels weren't canon and many of them would have looked just fine on a fanfic site. The only difference was that they had permission and got paid to be hacks. Now there are Star Wars fan movies on Youtube. In the Lucas days, he was fine with this as a cottage industry. As long as no one was making a living off of it, he didn't mind if they made a few bucks. I can't speak to how Disney's going to handle it since they tend to protect their trademarks more. . .militantly. When you're talking about blatantly ripping off the work of one author and trying to profit from it, its hard to make a case that what you're doing is ethical. When you're making an equally low quality knock off of a 40 year old movie owned by a major conglomerate and not making anything off of it, it gets more iffy. When they contracted you to do it, no one would argue that its unethical.
LeeEsq says
"Filing the serial numbers off" gave us Fifty Shades of Grey and thats all I have to say about that. Whats worse is that Fifty Shades of Grey isn't that an original plot. It was first written in 1908 as the Way of a Man with a Maid:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Way_of_a_Man_wit…
adamhunter1223 says
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Ke…
Marty Farley says
Given the rather sticky territory of this article, the biggest question on my brain (and it always is when running across PUA techniques) is," Who the hell has time for this??"
I know, I know, diverse hobbies make the world go round, but I am just flummoxed by the amount of energy, time, and thought process this sort of courting requires. Maybe I'm just lazy?
embertine says
Agreed, particularly when the Doc is talking about having a few shots and making practice approaches early in the evening. Because going out and having a chat with friends, or a bit of dance, is only the warm-up for trying to lie your way into someone's vagina? That is genuinely sad.
@kleenestar says
I don't think that's the implication. It's "hanging out with your friends is good for many things, including this One Weird Trick you probably haven't thought of!"
Bas Kleijweg says
I assumed this was basically going out with friends with the explicit purpose of practicing PUA(eg, group sarging sessions). I wouldn't understand how hyping each other up and getting in the mood are a sad thing, as they're enjoyable in and of itself(sort of like the concept of dudettes doffing up and eating together before a double date).
eselle28 says
I really don't approve of some of the conduct described in the article, but I don't think there's anything wrong with having a portion of an evening (or an entire evening, if the mood strikes) devoted to meeting sex partners. Doing nothing but that is going to make someone into a very dull person, but does every night out have to be primarily about chatting with friends and dancing with meeting new people as only an incidental, accidental benefit?
Gentleman Johnny says
You use the word "lie" and yet I do not see anything approaching deceptive going on here.
nonA says
For starters, extroverts love this sort of thing. Although they’re going to be underrepresented on internet message boards for obvious reasons.
The next big group, I’m surprised you can’t see where they come from. Getting your game on takes effort, but for a lot of people, success validates them when they’ve constantly been told that they’re inherently undesirable. The payoff can easily be worth the effort then.
Marty Farley says
Speaking as a gal who, depending on my relationship status and time of the month, would literally crawl across broken glass to get hit on, I STILL find this process exhausting. All of the validation in the world would not tempt me to spend this much time working on "game."
eselle28 says
I feel you, but I'm an introvert. I get the feeling that other personality types enjoy flirting enough that this seems appealing, at least as long as they also have other options and don't have a case of oneitis for the person.
I do think there's some use in describing a case where persistence isn't stalking, because the other person enjoys the interactions even if they've put some limits on how far they can go, but I think the ethics issues here are going to be distracting.
Gentleman Johnny says
Well, if you're going to clubs every week anyway, the time investment is all five minutes here, five minutes there, half an hour once a month. I definitely have people that I flirt with a bit whenever I run into them. Its not quite as active as this but our circles overlap enough. I'm not going out looking to see them but if I run into them, a little banter is just part of how we relate.
Or did you mean the whole first bar warm-up, then the club then this other place trying to meet a bunch of different women/ Because, yeah, dedicating a whole night to getting phone numbers is past my level of commitment.
Marty Farley says
Correct, it's dedicating entire nights to hooking up and getting laid repeatedly. And the texting thing to keep the banter going. That's what sounds exhausting to me. (Though probably the bar thing too. I have Couples' Coma even when I'm single at bars/parties. "Dear God, can I not just find a place to sit down?!")
Gentleman Johnny says
As relates to the texting, I guess I don't really see anything that takes less time in my week than brushing my teeth or commenting on articles here as a major time investment.
As for having a pickup night with buddies, not my thing but everyone gets to have a hobby.
Marty Farley says
Well if you're texting someone frequently (as I imagine in a flirty, banter, push-pull sort of thing), that's probably going to be more involved than brushing your teeth. Unless you brush your teeth every few minutes? 😛
Gentleman Johnny says
See, I don't see it that way. I'm thinking more like send a text once a day or so, maybe back and forth a few times. I have friends I message on Facebook that much.
rebootI730 says
I think this is very YMMV.
I just counted and I have 16 different text conversations going on right now with friends. It is not tiring because I do not have to think about what I am writing anymore than if I was talking and can ping whenever the mood suits.
Dr_NerdLove says
It's not exhausting for me (at least, when it's going well) because it's fun. I've said before: I like the dance. I like the flirting and the build-up, even if it doesn't go anywhere.(Although in fairness, there are times when my desire to get laid is greater than my desire to enjoy the game so I move on instead )The times it gets exhausting is when it goes badly. That's when I feel my energy drain outta me like I've got a hole in my chi.
RobinJ says
I don’t really understand what the point is of this article.
This only worked because you both knew that it was just a game and nothing more.
In other contexts I would think of this as pretty wrong. A guy flirts with a girl, even through he knows that she already has a boyfriend. It only worked because there wasn’t the intention to get a relationship. If the guy actually flirted because he wanted to have a relationship, he definetly would have crossed the border. And as a guy you probably wouldn’t want such a woman, because you know that she doesn’t mind to flirt with other men, even through she has a relationship with you
Robjection says
"There’re some aspects to how this went down that I’m not not proud of – not the least of which being that I was trying to get someone to cheat on her boyfriend."
Normally I leave spelling and grammar stuff alone, but in this case it makes a pretty big difference.
adamhunter1223 says
I was a bit wigged out by this. Persistently flirting with someone who specifically stated they have a boyfriend seems really duplicitous and screams CREEPER and ASSHOLE to me, and the fact that she encouraged him to keep it up would only throw up more red flags (at least for me). Granted, DNL put a disclaimer up top that he wasn't proud of part of this, but still, I think the ratio of time and effort vs reward gained is really skewed towards the former. I'd much rather find someone who didn't have a boyfriend and channel my time and energy there.
@deguwitharake says
She was sending mixed signals. "I have a boyfriend" is a line that can be used to reject a person, but it doesn't always mean that. For instance, when I say "I have a boyfriend," it means "my boyfriend and I are in an open relationship and he'd be totally cool with me sleeping with you as long as you're not trying to establish a monogamous relationship with me." You never know what sort of arrangements people have. For me, saying that line is the equivalent of "I'm not going to date you, but we can have sex if you keep being charming." If she wanted him to leave her alone, she could have said so at any time. Perhaps you would rather flirt with a woman in order to eventually establish a monogamous relationship with her, and thus you'd skip a partnered woman, but DNL clearly stated that he didn't want to date her.
Gentleman Johnny says
I fail to see the issue in persistently flirting with someone who is flirting back, boyfriend or no, provided it doesn't go past flirting.
adamhunter1223 says
*Necessary disclaimer: my opinion and my opinion only*
I'd be uncomfortable because someone who flirts while having a boyfriend comes off as deceitful to me and would be a sign that they're willing to cheat which is one of biggest turn-offs, if not the biggest. I've seen a couple relationships fall apart (including one extremely messy divorce) because one of the people involved cheated and I want absolutely nothing to do with that kind of thing, I refuse to be the Other Guy (TM).
@kleenestar says
I think that's a legitimate position both pragmatically and ethically. As long as you understand that for some people flirting is part of a healthy relationship, there's absolutely nothing wrong with saying "Nope, no way, not messing with that."
adamhunter1223 says
If it works for other couples that's fine, it's not my place to say anything; but, well, it just isn't me.
RobinJ says
@kleenstar I don’t really understand how flirting with someone when you’re already in a relationship is healthy
BiSian says
1. The relationship is not monogamous. And/or both parties have discussed what they consider fidelity and flirtation is acceptable to them.
2. Flirting can be exciting and prompt a bunch of fun, sexy energy that the person then brings home to their partner.
3. Flirting can be conversely annoying (see the statements of some commenters here) and remind the person why they're so grateful for their relationship.
4. Flirting is a fun activity and why should a person be barred from something they consider fun just because they have a partner?
5. What one person considers flirting another considers being friendly. Barring a person from "flirting" can look like forbidding them from talking AT ALL to a person of their preferred gender.
Tea_Fish says
I think a lot of people are missing the context where this is the result of a lot of positive interactions, building up to sex, not "I met this smoking hottie" –> harassing her all the time/tediously nagging and chasing her around to get into her pants –> DNL gets into her pants, hurray!
It may very well not be everyone's cup of tea (it's certainly not mine), but a lot of people enjoy the flirting, snuggling, catch-and-release, and sexual tension parts of courting, and are happy to play this (hopefully mutually enjoyable) game together. Like any game (including say, boardgames, videogames), it's not for everyone, in fact, I think this is a pretty obvious instance of hooking up, not dating and looking for something long term like lots of readers want. Nobody should feel obligated to play, but it has its time, its place, and people for whom this is totally appropriate and fun. What's important is to CONFIRM that everyone is on board to play, and Doc did do that multiple times throughout the course of their interaction.
For the boyfriend aspect, cheating is one of those things that sets my teeth on edge, but on the other hand, we have no idea what sort of arrangement Jay's got with her boyfriend, and if everything she did with DNL was aboveboard by the standards of their relationship. Whether or not you ought to flirt with someone who claims to be shacked up but is giving out unambiguous come hither signs? Well, I wouldn't, but that's not everyone.
eselle28 says
I agree there's a lot of nuance here. For me, I'd say the line would be if someone is out with their partner and waves you off instead of interacting with you as they normally would or taking you over for an introduction. It's not iron clad proof that the flirting wouldn't be okay with the other person, but it's not a great sign.
That being said, this is an old story, and there are good lessons here.
Marty Farley says
Yeah that's a similar line for me. Up until that point, I was rather neutral about the behavior (hey somebody enjoy the flirting/have a more open relationship that might still not include kissing/sex), but when she wouldn't introduce him and waved him off is when I went "Ehhhh, I feel uncomfortable about this…."
Given how many PUAs are fixated on stealing women from their boyfriends (a whole heck lot of em, given the focus on that in their teachings), it made me squirm a little bit. There are some good lessons about push-pull dynamics and banter, but I wish it wasn't wrapped up so neatly in a PUA package of "Yep, she'll totally dump her boyfriend for you."
@kleenestar says
Oh, man, I would LOVE to see some guy try to steal me from my husband. It would be epically hilarious.
(Obviously the behavior more generally is pretty shitty.)
eselle28 says
Why are PUAs so focused on stealing women from their boyfriends, anyway? I don't mean this story, which seems to be about a strong attraction to someone specific, but I agree that I see lots of dudes crowing about how they slept with women who have husbands/boyfriends.
It's not like there aren't any attractive single women out there. I mean, I guess I can see it as a sort of validation that you're really desirable…except that I'm guessing most of the women willing to be "stolen" are ones on the tail ends of bad relationships who are looking to cheat so they have an excuse to end things or ones who are keeping an eye out for a rebound when they do get around to breaking up. Both of those are often more about being in the right place at the right time than anything all that compelling about the cheating partner/rebound. There's also the aspect of dominance over other men, which…I don't know, if that's a compelling reason for someone to have sex, I'm going to roll my eyes at them a bit.
@kleenestar says
Yeah, a play for both homosocial validation and dominance would be my read.
Mel_ says
I think it's very much because for those guys, sex isn't about a personal connection or even physical pleasure, it's an achievement, an ego boost. And the higher the difficulty of "getting" the sex, the bigger the achievement and thus the prouder you can feel about it. And in theory it's more difficult to "get" sex from a woman who's attached than from one who's single.
In short, it's a result of very very commodified views on sex.
LeeEsq says
This seems about right. Many people also believe that "all is fair in love and war" and generally don't have any problems with seducing, stealing, or whatever somebody else's partner if they desire him or her. They simply perceive themselves as Mr. or Ms. Randy Pandy and are entitled to what they want. Its a very self-centered view of the world.
I tend towards the opposite extreme. I refuse to get involved with somebody if I know they are dating or in a relationship with anybody else. I'm a monogamist and believe that respecting other relationships is an important part of monogamy. Even if a relationship is really bad and heading towards the end, you don't make a move till you have official word that its over.
Marty Farley says
I'm sure the "why" behind guys who crow over stealing women away from boyfriends/husbands could fill several thick, small-print books.
However, what I find strange is I see these same guys crowing about their success, while simultaneously saying you can't trust and date the woman who just slept with him. "After all, she cheated on her husband, how loyal can she be?" It's kind of a bizarre double-bind; so sleeping with her was a huge accomplishment because she had so many barriers/obstacles, but because you proved those obstacles can be surpassed, SHE'S the one at fault? Bwah?
Mel_ says
From what I've seen, those guys don't think there are some women you can trust and date and others you can't. They think all women are untrustworthy and use cheating instances as "proof" that all women will cheat if a guy with enough game comes along. The idea isn't, "She cheated on her bf/husband, so therefore she's less worthy of dating than some other woman," it's, "She cheated on her bf/husband, so therefore women aren't worthy of dating, and guys are justified in doing whatever they can to get just sex."
TheWisp says
What others said about competition.
By the way, women do this too. I've heard a number of anecdotes about men who experience women flirting with them more when they have a wedding ring on vs. than when they don't.
OtherRoooToo says
That has a lot to do with that man being *safe to practice flirting with* (he won't hit on you and push past your boundaries – hopefully, because when a married man does that that is another whole discussion, and they do do it, don't kid yourself – and also he's more relaxed and not doing that nervous thing nervous single men do where it takes them all night & several martinis to work up the nerve to even talk to you).
There's more than one way to perceive any interaction between two opposite gender humans, even if the "Game" books all say otherwise.
TheWisp says
"Yeah that's a similar line for me. Up until that point, I was rather neutral about the behavior (hey somebody enjoy the flirting/have a more open relationship that might still not include kissing/sex), but when she wouldn't introduce him and waved him off is when I went "Ehhhh, I feel uncomfortable about this…." "
I'm not sure that's proof that he wouldn't be okay with her flirting with other people, though. I wouldn't be shocked if they had some sort of "don't ask, don't tell" thing going with flirting.
eselle28 says
Yes, that's possible too. It was just the point at which I got a bit worried that this wasn't all necessarily on the up and up. It's not a smoking gun by any means.
@kleenestar says
From the way DNL tells the story, it sounds like he acted like a jerk before she had the opportunity to introduce him, so we don't actually know whether she would have or not. If someone mocked my husband to my face, there's no way they'd get introduced to him, and there's no way they'd get to spend more time around me, either.
Mel_ says
To be fair, what he says is that he came over to say hi, she waved him off (which he found unusual) and later came over to him and apologized for the brush off by explaining her boyfriend was there. Only then did DNL start mocking the guy. Which doesn't mean it isn't a "don't ask, don't tell" thing, but she definitely appears to have been avoiding her boyfriend seeing her friendly with DNL from the get go.
SarahGryph says
It might not even be a don't ask don't tell. Storytime from me – this happened back when I was hanging out in a very social, touchy feely group. My bf at the time knew this about our group, and he also knew I had a male best friend that was close to me. We play flirted sometimes, had a few songs at parties where we'd squee at each other and dance together. Well myself and guy-friend danced one night and my bf seemed upset. I took him aside and asked if everything was alright – he basically said that he was fine with what I'd done, and normally it wouldn't have bothered him, but he'd had a rough day and would have preferred more of my attention. After that, I was more careful about what I'd do when he was around (and he also was with me) – NOT because I was doing anything wrong, but because we'd realized he and I were both only ok with the play flirting if we were ourselves in a pretty decent mood.
Guy-friend and I weren't working on dating, but just an example of how behavior "not while the bf is here" doesn't always mean "she is lying or going behind his back."
LurkingGhest says
I agree that the situation described here depends on a lot of context (which is explained in the post) and is the result of positive interactions, but I really don't know how helpful it would be, especially to this audience. It sounds like a lot of PUA advice, which is often aimed at picking up women in the club/bar environment and has limited applicability to other situations. Usually when I hear stories about someone who is heavily flirting with a partnered-up person one of two things happens: the situation is dragged out and the single person feels used, frustrated and led on or they end up cheating.
This also seems like a case of mixed messages, and while DNL was obviously highly socially calibrated, usually in cases of mixed messages, it's better to talk it out or not bother.
Bwmn says
For this board, and this very specific story – I get that it might not hold a lot of similar parallels. However, I was able to relate to this a lot in regards to trying to date someone who has an incredibly busy schedule. Not just 'works a lot of overtime' – but that mix of "works long hours, 6-7 days a week, and has time off that doesn't compliment the time that I have off".
In a situation I had with a guy I was dating with that kind of schedule, it really was a case of having to trust the positive interactions, rely on texting, and doing a lot of the initiating (but trying to measure whether his responses were still interested). Now I can't imagine personally expending that kind of patience and analysis for most guys – but he was special, we had a great connection, and I felt it was worth it.
Picking apart this specific situation probably won't apply to lots of readers, but I do think that the overall idea of patience and persistence in relation to other 'challenges with connecting' (i.e. not the person has a significant other) is worthwhile.
Trixnix says
I respect you, Dr Nerdlove. You've given a lot of good advice that's benefited me. This was obviously a long time ago and I don't like writing this but: Dude, you got played.
Jay was totally batshit. She has a boyfriend? Well, does she now….? Did the boyfriend have a magic spell keeping her in his magic castle or something? This woman wanted to have her cake and eat it. She decided you were sleeping together. Not your persistence, not your techniques, not PUA. She did. She was the one in charge here.
Not that there's anything wrong with a woman liking a man and going for what she wants. Despite the nonsense of PUA, that's usually how it happens anyway. PUA techniques do not work on women who don't like you to begin with and because the women like you to begin with, PUA techniques are ultimately pointless.
Jay ran the show from start to finish. Yes, ignoring her "I have a boyfriend" stuff was pretty creepy but so was her flirting and teasing a guy who wasn't her boyfriend even within sight and earshot of her boyfriend. Not the behaviour of normal, well balanced people whether it's a game or not. If she wanted to sleep with you at any point during your interactions, she could have done. She could have dumped her boyfriend. But oh no, that would have lost her her excuse for stringing you along and only getting so far.
She got you into bed. Which is fine if all you really wanted was to sleep with her. PUA emphasises validating yourself through the women you sleep with so it's only natural PUAs strive for sex at all costs. Even when the woman is clearly nuts. But how many well balanced, normal women could you have met, slept with and dated in the months you wasted pining after this lunatic? Her body may have been amazing. Her mind sounds like it needed a lot of work.
Now, okay, I've tried validating myself through women too. And I've been in PUA before I realized it was total nonsense and largely interested on getting men's money and pissing off/creeping out women. I also had my own version of Jay and my friends at the time took me aside and pointed out that my version of Jay was playing games and crazy as a loon. And I didn't listen. I thought being strung along by a game playing lunatic was fun. I've been there which is why nowadays I don't tend to put up with women like that if I can help it.
As I said, I respect you and you've obviously grown a lot since your PUA days and I can't say I didn't get trapped in the same nonsense as you did. I sincerely hope you never encounter anyone as messed up as Jay ever again.
Dr_NerdLove says
So, I wanted to address this specifically, Trix because holy shit you’ve made a bunch of unwarranted assumptions here.To start with: how exactly did I get played? Because what we have here is a) a man attracted to a woman, b) a woman who’s attracted to the man and c) said woman not being willing to *act* on that attraction and c) two people who enjoy flirting with one another. There’s no point where I’m being compelled against my will, or where Jay led me on. Hell there was never a moment where she even *suggested* that maybe I should hang around long enough and I might get a blowie or something. The closest we ever came to *that* was when she was dancing with me and by that point, it wasn’t exactly a secret to either of us that we really would like to fuck.If she was trying to get something out of our interactions outside of some fun flirty talk, she was failing rather miserably. As many of the others on here have pointed out: there’s nothing freaky or unholy about someone enjoying flirting, especially when she’s making the point that *that’s as far as it will go*.Considering how I’d act about her boyfriend, I’m not *surprised* she didn’t want me around him or to talk about him. I was acting like an immature asshole about it.(With one exception: at one point when she reminded me about her boyfriend, I responded “What’s your man got to do with me?” Unfortunately, she’d never heard the song, so I had to explain the joke.)There wasn’t any manipulation. There wasn’t any “stringing me along”. I wasn’t exactly waiting with sandwiches by the phone hoping she’d call – I was out talking to, flirting with and hooking up with other women, same thing I did every night, Pinky. If I saw her or she saw me, we’d flirt. I’d text her to see if she was out and we’d hang out for a little bit and then we’d go our separate ways back to whatever else we were doing.And believe me, neither of us wanted to *date*. This was a physical thing, pure and simple. It burned hot and then it burned out fairly quickly, as such things do and we went our separate ways.And trust me, Jay was many things but damaged, toxic or crazy was NOT one of them.
Trixnix says
Also: you can't insult her boyfriend but she can insult her boyfriend by going behind his back with random dudes?
Classy girl.
@kleenestar says
You have no idea how much "behind his back" this was. For all you know, if DNL hadn't decided to be a dick and poke fun at the boyfriend, she'd have introduced the two of them on the spot.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
You're right. I don't know how behind his back this was. But even if this was full in his view it's still nuts. She has a boyfriend. She keeps saying she won't sleep with a guy she keeps leading on because she has a boyfriend. Which kinda suggests the boyfriend isn't too fond of his girlfriend sleeping with other guys and him knowing about it. She has a boyfriend. That's up to her. She could not have a boyfriend and have been with Dr Nerdlove pretty much any time she wanted (in the absence of the boyfriend being controlling and abusive or other circumstances).
enail0_o says
Perhaps the boyfriend isn't too fond of his girlfriend sleeping with other guys. Perhaps he'd be cool with it and it's her who isn't interested in sleeping with other guys. Perhaps he's not okay with her flirting at all and she's being a jerk. But the information isn't here to make that call.
@kleenestar says
No, it's not nuts. You just lack the imagination to understand a relationship where this makes sense. It's not a relationship I would want to be in, but I can understand that other people have different relationship dynamics than I do.
Among other things, people can enjoy flirting for its own sake. Flirting != "leading on." She made clear that things were not going anywhere. Doesn't mean she wasn't enjoying the flirting as an activity, and in fact I'd guess she was able to enjoy it precisely because it wasn't going anywhere.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
Yes, people can enjoy flirting for it's own sake. But why be attached and then go off and flirt with other people? I don't lack imagination to understand anything. What two people do privately is there business but this also involves other people who may not always know exactly what's what and what flirting game is being played.
Jay may well have enjoyed the flirting for it's own sake. But look how she behaves when her boyfriend is around. If he's fine with it all then why does she keep it out of his gaze when he's around? Maybe we do things different in the UK but when you're attached to someone, it's kinda the point that you flirt with them and not with random people you meet in bars.
What people do privately between themselves is fine and their business. But the world does not revolve around them and their games. There's other people involved. If everybody is on board with everything then fine. But that is very rarely the case.
I mean no offense to anyone here or elsewhere who enjoys that kind of relationship. I assumed that everyone here who enjoyed those kind of relationships would take extra care not to hurt others and keep others informed about what was going on.
I just object to this style of relationship because I find off putting. That is my opinion.
@kleenestar says
If you can't figure out why someone in a happy, monogamous relationship might enjoy flirting with other people, then yes, in fact, you do lack the imagination to consider people with different relationship models than you. I get that this situation would make you extremely insecure, and therefore you don't want it to happen. Fortunately, not everyone is you.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
It's only fun if everyone involved finds it fun. Not if one person finds it fun. I know not everyone is me. But just because one person finds something fun doesn't make it right. Everybody has to find it fun for it to actually be fun.
One_True_Guest says
No one is saying otherwise.
Gentleman Johnny says
Classy enough to not outright cheat on him. My overall impression is that she wasn't a huge Winger fan but other circumstances were in the way of breaking it off, like maybe they lived together. Given that, it was reasonably classy of her to wait until they broke up.
Trixnix says
@GJ/
Classy enough not to cheat on him but not classy enough to leave off flirting openly with guys who were not her boyfriend. If this were an open relationship/fun type thing, the boyfriend would not be an obstacle. He'd be part of the fun.
It really wasn't classy of her to wait till she broke up with her boyfriend. She was openly flirting with someone who was not her boyfriend. If her boyfriend really mattered to as much as she claimed he did, she would probably not have been openly flirting with guys who were not him.
Living together is a problem. That is true. But she could still have broken up with her boyfriend and started to move out and sleep with Dr Nerdlove as a single agent. But no, it was playing games time.
There were some things here that Dr Nerdlove did that were somewhat creepy. The stuff this woman did was toxic and disturbing. There are people here who very kindly tell me I deserve not to have jerk friends. Well, Dr Nerdlove deserved not to have to put up with this woman. She's all kinds of toxic.
Here's a clue: if you enjoy flirting with random strangers you meet in bars, don't have a boyfriend. Be single. Of course flirting doesn't have to go anywhere and people have the right to boundaries. But this was game playing and not in a good way.
eselle28 says
I think you're being too absolutist here. I think the point where this got sketchy was where she seemed not to be willing to flirt when her boyfriend was around. That signals he wasn't aware of or wouldn't approve of the flirting.
There are relationships where it's mutually agreed that the limits on fidelity are that both people are allowed to flirt with random strangers they meet in bars, while kissing and sex are off limits. Who are you to tell people who enjoy that kind of set up that they must stay single rather than find someone compatible?
I also disapprove of the use of the word creepy here. The problem with this is shades of cheating, not with boundary violations. Jay was pretty clear that she liked flirting with Nerdlove, and he was pretty clear that he was okay flirting with her even if she didn't want to sleep with him.
Trixnix says
@Eselle28.
In all honesty, a relationship where both parties are allowed to flirt with other people is toxic. I'm sure people enjoy it and it's not up to me to tell them not to. You're right. It's just not very healthy. Why be with someone in the first place if you want to continuously flirt with other people?
She had a boyfriend. There is no evidence her boyfriend knew or was okay with her flirting with Dr Nerdlove and the fact she was less than willing to flirt when her boyfriend was around kinda suggests that not all parties were aware of exactly what was going on.
Jay has a boundary that she won't have sex with Dr Nerdlove because she has a boyfriend. That boundary should have been respected but Jay is constantly and apparently knowingly making Dr Nerdlove push at that boundary. She's not respecting her own boundary.
Yes, Jay liked flirting with Dr Nerdlove. She got attention of guys other than her boyfriend. Great fun. Toxic beyond belief but good fun and games. She knows she's not going to sleep with Dr Nerdlove but she keeps flirting with him anyway. It's become evidently clear Dr Nerdlove wants sex so he's not just happy flirting with Jay and having nothing happen. He wants something from the encounter. She plays him. She is dangerous.
It may be absolutist to think this way but avoids toxic game playing, messy nonsense and mixed messages.
eselle28 says
They're presumably together because they want to be. Not everyone gets all of their social, romantic, and sexual needs met by one person. At one end of things, most of us agree that people in a relationship will have some platonic friendships and interests they don't share. At the other end, some people agree to anything goes open relationship, with no restrictions on partner choice. A lot of people are somewhere in between. If it's by mutual agreement, who are you to tell them that they should get all their needs met by each other?
She's respecting her own boundaries just fine. She asserted them several times when he was clarifying what exactly they were, and thereafter he mostly respected them. I didn't see him pushing them, and if he had chosen to do so, she wouldn't have been making him. That would have been his choice. Just to repeat this, because it's important: The fact that you don't like a woman's boundaries doesn't give you, or anyone else, the right to push them.
I agree that the fact of whether Jay's boyfriend was okay with her flirting or not changes the moral dimension of this discussion, but your insistence on condemning it even if everyone involved was perfectly okay with it is puzzling – and some of the statements you're making in support of it are really gross.
Trixnix says
@eselle28.
The key here is IF it's by mutual agreement. Jay's behaviour suggests otherwise. She's not respecting her own boundaries. She's saying no but flirting in a way she knows will make people push at her boundaries. I respect boundaries. Jay is constantly saying "no" but then engaging in flirty behaviour which just asks people to push at her boundaries. If someone did push at her boundaries then it would not be here fault. But she's not exactly respecting her own boundaries here.
Maybe we do things differently dating wise in the UK but life and the universe do not revolve around one couple's needs. If everyone is onboard with it and knows what's going on, fine. But you can't guarantee that when flirting with random strangers. If she doesn't get her needs met by her boyfriend, dump him and get a new boyfriend.
@kleenestar says
"Flirting makes people push boundaries" <——- this is absolutely disgusting. People are responsible for their own behavior. If someone makes clear they want to flirt and nothing more, the decent choices are to respect that boundary or walk away. If you think flirting implies you're supposed to push a clearly set boundary you are a creepy asshole. It's also the same logic that a large percentage of rapists use to justify their behavior.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
No it isn't. If you have a boundary then you are responsible for it too as well as other people. It's not 100% other people's responsibility. You must also respect your own boundaries.
The universe does not revolve around what one person finds fun in a relationship. It's only fun is everyone onboard finds it fun. Otherwise it's dodgy.
If you flirt with someone knowing full well that they don't find it fun and want more then you are continuously asking someone to push up against your own boundaries.
Your boundaries are also your responsibilities. Not just other people's.
I'm not justifying rape here. I'm pointing out that people have responsibilities. Other people have the responsibility to respect a person's boundaries. And the person with a boundary has the responsibility to respect their own boundaries.
Common sense.
@kleenestar says
So … are you saying you think DNL didn't find the flirting fun just because he also hoped to sleep with her?
If he didn't want to flirt with her, then yes, she should have stopped flirting with him – it's a jerk move to flirt with someone who isn't interested in participating. But that is not what you've actually been arguing here. You've been saying that because he wanted to sleep with her, he was incapable of enjoying the flirting for what it was, and that even though he was an enthusiastic participant her flirting with him didn't respect his boundaries. That is both ethically unpleasant and makes no sense.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar
"So … are you saying you think DNL didn't find the flirting fun just because he also hoped to sleep with her? "
He has a different agenda to her. He wants what she doesn't. Two people not on the same page.
"You've been saying that because he wanted to sleep with her, he was incapable of enjoying the flirting for what it was, and that even though he was an enthusiastic participant her flirting with him didn't respect his boundaries. That is both ethically unpleasant and makes no sense."
He has a different agenda to what she wants. People here have been arguing that this was two people knowing the score and wanting the same thing when it clearly isn't. One person wants sex. The other doesn't at that time. That's not two people on the same page/
Mel_ says
Wait. So, Jay likes flirting with DNL. DNL is acting as if he likes flirting with her, even though she's told him nothing more will happen. But Jay is supposed to psychically determine that DNL must actually not be okay with nothing more happening, and to stop flirting with him despite the fact that *he* is initiating a lot of the flirting and also respecting her boundaries when she states them? Why is Jay more responsible for deciding whether their interactions are acceptable than DNL is? It seems to me it would be pretty patronizing of her to assume he can't handle just flirting with her and not getting anything more, when he's given no indications of that and could stop at any time if he was actually finding it unpleasant.
One_True_Guest says
This. 1000x this. How exactly was Jay to know that DNL wanted more and was unhappy that she wasn't engaging in more when HE was the one who kept seeking her out, kept texting her, kept up with the interaction??? She isn't a friggin' mind reader. But here's the weirdest thing of the whole thing, the above story? WRITTEN BY DNL. From his perspective. This isn't Jay telling us a story about a fun flirting experience and us speculating that DNL didn't enjoy it. We know for a fact he DID enjoy it because he SAYS AS MUCH. So what exactly is your issue Trix? Is it that YOU wouldn't enjoy it and therefore feel a need to point out if someone did that to you you would be unhappy? Is that's your point, that not all people are the same? Grand! But then don't make your statement about Jay's behaviour with DNL. Make it about your hypothetical reaction to Jay.
eselle28 says
This is not what flirting is, Trixnix. If you think it is, I think you may need to take a break from dating and spend a little more time getting your head together. This also isn't doing much to help with your narrative of "Trixnix is a really good guy who people otherwise like and feel safe around, but is thwarted at every turn when he tries to date because other men are better looking than he is." If you think that flirting is asking people to push at boundaries, I'm not sure people around you are reading you as a good guy and a safe person to date.
Jay made it perfectly clear what was going on at the end of her first conversation with The Doctor. If he didn't like the set up, he didn't need to keep participating. Why do you keep insisting that women get all their needs met by boyfriends, whether they're single or in relationships? Some women like to flirt. Some of them like to do so when they already have boyfriends, and some of them like to do so when they're single and don't want boyfriends.
@kleenestar says
I'll go further: trixnix has successfully convinced me that he is not a good guy or a safe person to date. The question is whether people in his face-to-face community are picking up on the same things.
eselle28 says
Is that really a question? It seems like his community is very aware of and able to identify people who they feel unsafe around, even if they're not very good at dealing with them. Aside from all this, Trixnix is hanging out with someone who's been labeled creepy by others and is apparently getting excluded from small groups that have separated off to hang out without the larger group. I increasingly think it's unlikely that the group's impression of him matches up with his description.
Trixnix says
@Eselle28
"I increasingly think it's unlikely that the group's impression of him matches up with his description."
My social groups impression of me is largely their own business but being part of the private social groups that have split off from the main meetup group on a consistent basis gives me the confidence that people do value my time and my presence/
Mel_ says
Do those private groups include the people who insult your appearance and your chances with women to your face? Because if so, it's just as (if not more) likely that they include you because you let them use you as a convenient punching bag than because they like and respect you… If they liked and respected you, why on earth would they say horrible things to you?
enail0_o says
Hey, now. Bringing peoples' jobs into it is not cool.
eselle28 says
Yes. Also, it's not very realistic to expect one's therapist not to have any personal issues. That would mean getting therapy from a robot. The obligation is to manage them so that they don't end up interfering with work.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
So, me unintentionally insulting the romantic lives of the people here is bad but this from you is okay?
@kleenestar says
You're welcome to share your opinion of my romantic life based on things I've said on this forum, though I'll be taking it with a grain of salt given your really screwed-up ideas about relationships.
Similarly, I've drawn conclusions about you based on how you behave and the ideas you express. I started out thinking your self-description as "a decent guy who just doesn't get a chance because of his looks" was relatively accurate, but you seem more and more like an unreliable narrator. As I said, it's not that I randomly decided you aren't a good guy or a safe person to be around. Specific things you've said and specific positions you've espoused have changed my mind.
I'm not sure why you'd expect me not to draw conclusions about you based on how you behave. Obviously you're welcome to do the same for me.
Trixnix says
@Eselle28
What some women like to do is neither here nor there unless: EVERYONE INVOLVED FINDS IT FUN. I've put that in capitals not to shout but to try to point out the common sense here. It's not all about what one person finds fun. Everyone has to find it fun otherwise people are being messed around.
It's Dr Nerdlove's responsibility to respect Jay's boundaries. But it's also Jay's responsibility to make sure that Dr Nerdlove actually finds the flirting fun and she isn't consistently forcing him to push against her boundaries. Two people involved here. Two adults. Two sets of responsibilities.
Don't call me creepy because I realize the need for adults to respect one another.
Flirting can mean many different things to different people. Which is why it remains fundamentally important to make sure everyone finds the flirting fun. It's the person who doesn't do that and thinks everyone else has to fit in with what they find fun who is the creep.
@kleenestar says
WHAT IN GOD'S NAME MAKES YOU THINK DNL DID NOT FIND THE FLIRTING FUN
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
Because he wants something she doesn't. Can you find something fun when you have an agenda behind it that the other person doesn't have?
@kleenestar says
The fact that you describe his desire to have sex with her as "an agenda" is pretty gross. But, let's leave that aside and address the larger point. Yes, it's absolutely possible for me to enjoy interacting with someone when there are things I want from them that I can't have – as long as I'm ALSO getting something I want that I CAN have. For example, I have a very dear friend who has a social circle I'm not part of. I'd love to be part of that social circle, and it sometimes makes me feel sad that I can't be – but at the same time, I love the things I DO get to do with her, and I value them for what they are.
Elizabeth Cole says
Yes! I enjoy playing Scrabble. The other person wants to win. I want them not to win. OR: my friend in college was known for never being startled. People would set things up to try and startle him. It was a fun game for both sides. You may not take pleasure from that dynamic. Lots of other people do. I can believe that you would not have had fun in DNL's situation. He seems to have enjoyed it. Please stop trying to deny everyone else's lived experience because you don't share it.
Mel_ says
Yes. I found writing books fun for years even though I also wanted to get those books published and I hadn't yet managed to do so. Wanting an activity to turn into something more doesn't make it impossible to enjoy that activity in itself.
Have you honestly never enjoyed something even while you hoped it might lead to more? You never enjoy conversations with women you find attractive unless they then decide to date you? You've never enjoyed learning a new skill before you'd reached the skill level you wanted to achieve, or enjoyed playing a game or sport you would have liked to win even if you didn't win? If you can't enjoy anything in life without getting your maximum desired outcome from it, then you're going to live a pretty sad life.
One_True_Guest says
You also seem to forget that DNL from the beginning acknowledges sex might not ever happen. That he moves on to other women in his PUA way. That he continues flirting with Jay because it's FUN. This is the problem for you. You don't think flirting alone can be fun. And you see it as kind of a weird form of blue balls when what the person REALLY wants is sex. But for others, wanting to have sex with someone with whom you don't really know it will happen with but can flirt with is a hell of a lot of fun, and a pretty swell activity to engage in. Sure sex would also be nice, but if it doesn't happen the flirting alone can be pretty hot and exciting.
I'll tell you Trix, one of the reasons kleenestar is responding so viscerally to you is that you give the impression that it's sex or nothing. That sex is such a huge friggin' deal that anything less is losing out. That someone showing you sexy naughty attention is just teasing because the only good thing that can come out of that is sex. The idea that flirting would make you so miserable because you know the person wouldn't have sex with you suggests A LOT about your personality. It suggests that you think women who flirt are teases, are denying you something, are laughing at you because they get you all hot an bothered. Instead of thinking of women who are flirting with you as wanting to engage in safe sexy fun times. That YOU TOO get to engage in. That the two of you together are doing a dance (but with words instead). That you both have power in.
And ultimately, we know that DNL was having a good time or he would have stopped it. He was at the height of his PUA era where I assume he was doing just fine getting laid. This wasn't a Oneitis situation where it was this girl or he'd never have sex again and she knew that and was taking advantage or something. This was two smart people being witty and naughty together and enjoying it. Just because YOU wouldn't doesn't mean that he didn't.
BiSian says
Ooh Example Time!
I go to a Meetup group that's organized by this guy I know–let's call him Marcos. Marcos does not date, hook up with, or even kiss any woman who is a part of the group. For him, the group is linked to his professional life and he would find that kind of interaction deeply inappropriate. He told me about these boundaries the first time we got a coffee together.
He flirts with me, a lot. It's often joking, antagonistic flirtation. For example: "Bisian, you're a heart-breaker! If you were mine, you'd kill me, hahahah" (translating to English loses the play on words but not the meaning).
It's a flirtation I enjoy with a person I find really fun and interesting. I would definitely ask him out if he were interested.
But that would be inappropriate and in direct violation of the boundaries that he explicitly expressed and continues to enforce (with others as well as me).
So…Is Marcos toying with me? Is he encouraging me to try and push through his boundaries?
Or is this different for some particular reason?
eselle28 says
I like Example Time! Also, I think throwing in another one might help people who don't like to flirt for fun. In all the defenses of it being an okay thing to do, I think it might seem like everyone is all for it and like people who don't enjoy it are somehow bad. That's not true, either. I don't actually like to flirt all that much.
So, this is someone I don't hang out with anymore, because he's a friend of an ex-boyfriend who kept him after the breakup. Let's call him Chad. He's a highly social and flirtatious person who enjoys flirting for the hell of it. He was – and it looks like still is – married to a woman who he met in high school. He has pretty similar boundaries to Jay – all the teasing in the world is fine, but no kissing and certainly nothing more than that. His wife is perfectly aware of his flirting and seems to rather enjoy it when other women find her husband attractive.
When I first met Chad, he used to flirt with me sometimes. His wife obviously didn't mind, and while my boyfriend wouldn't have liked it if I'd flirted with some men, he wouldn't have cared if I'd flirted with Chad because he knew it was just fooling around. But…you know what? I didn't like flirting with Chad. It's not my favorite way of interacting with people, and it made me feel uncomfortable even if there wasn't anything unethical going on. So, I didn't flirt with him. I talked to him like a regular person and rolled my eyes and ignored a couple of particularly cheesy lines. It worked out just fine – after a few times, Chad figured out I wasn't interested in interacting with him that way and started treating me like his male friends. No one toyed with, no one encouraged to push through boundaries, no unhappy endings.
Trixnix says
"His wife is perfectly aware of his flirting and seems to rather enjoy it when other women find her husband attractive. "
Not exactly emotionally healthy behaviour now, is it?
"No one toyed with, no one encouraged to push through boundaries, no unhappy endings."
Surely until he figured out you didn't enjoy this style of communication, his behaviour to you wasn't on. Which is my entire point here. It's only fun if everyone involved is on the same page and enjoying it.
@kleenestar says
Yes, actually, it sounds very emotionally healthy. From the limited information we have, it sounds like she is secure enough not to feel threatened by other women appreciating what she has, and she trusts her husband to maintain the boundaries they've agreed on in his behavior toward other women.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
It does not sound healthy. She's not threatened by other women yet she seems to care a great deal what other women think of her husband?
@kleenestar says
Sure! Here's my own version of that: every woman who gets to know my husband thinks I'm the luckiest woman alive, and I know that several of them would be really happy to date him if they could. I'm not threatened by this – my husband wants me first, last, and only – but it's really nice to see that other people recognize the same wonderful qualities in him that I do. It makes me feel even luckier that he chose me.
Now, maybe you want to call that unhealthy … but I'm talking from the perspective of nearly eighteen successful years here.
Mel_ says
Er, "enjoying it" =/= "caring a great deal". I enjoy eating chocolate, but I don't care a great deal about whether I have any or not.
One_True_Guest says
And SHE was the one who stopped him from flirting with her. She didn't wait for Chad to just assume she wasn't into flirting, she changed HER behaviour and he noticed and then changed his. It was HER responsibility, not HIS. Just as it would have been up to DNL to signal he wasn't into Jay flirting with him, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Trixnix says
@BiSian.
If you find it fun AND HE FINDS IT FUN TOO, then it's fine.
If, however, one of you does not find it fun and wants more then it's not fine.
@kleenestar says
Ah, I see your problem. You assume "wants more" == "does not find the current activity fun." That is not true for everyone, trixnix.
Dr_NerdLove says
Indeed.Strange as it may seem, I’m able to hold two separate concepts (in this case “I want to sleep with this woman” and “I like flirting with her”) in my brain at the same time.
Trixnix says
@DrNerdlove.
But you're not on the same page with one wanting sex and the other not. You have a want she doesn't have at that time.
@kleenestar says
It sounds like this is maybe coming from the same place as "you should get all your needs met by one person." Hint: it's not any healthier when you're not even in a relationship with the person involved.
Mel_ says
Wow. So now you're telling DNL directly that he can't tell for himself whether he's enjoying an activity or not? You know better than he does how his emotions work and what he's felt? All right then.
One_True_Guest says
Trix – this is clearly a personal issue for you. You don't want to be flirted with by anyone who isn't interested in you romantically or sexually, who wouldn't follow through with the flirting. That is fine. Those are your preferences. But for god's sake man, when DNL himself tells you he was cool with it and enjoyed it, stop telling him that it doesn't matter what he felt, what was happening was wrong. NO ONE THOUGHT IT WAS WRONG. Only YOU think it's wrong because YOU wouldn't like it. And that's okay. You are allowed not to like casual flirting. But stop telling people what they like or not. This is like when you say that women always prefer good looking guys and when the women here tell you they like other kinds of guys you saying that they probably just didn't notice certain things about that guy's personality or that if a hotter guy came along they would prefer them to the guy the women claim to like.
Stop telling others what they would prefer. Especially when they tell you the opposite!!! Talk about what YOU would prefer. But stop with the universals. Stop insisting what you want is what everyone secretly wants. You aren't everyone. And it's really darn rude of you.
rebootI730 says
The good doctor also had a blast flirting with her. He quite enjoyed the game, I do believe
Mel_ says
"In all honesty, a relationship where both parties are allowed to flirt with other people is toxic."
Wow. So you're basically declaring that any relationship that isn't 100% monogamous down to how you talk to other people is by definition toxic? Which logically can only mean the polyamorous folks here in the comments section, who have relationships where they're not only allowed to flirt with other people but have sex with other people without the other party behind involved, are by their nature toxic? You don't see how offensive it is to say that?
Trixnix says
@Mel.
When people have mutual partners and everyone is onboard and okay with that, fine. But when it's not like that and there are serious doubts as to whether both parties involved are in on the whole thing, then it becomes toxic. Just to clarify.
If you're in a monogamous relationship with someone but you can't get your needs met by that person, surely the response is to break up and find someone else?
eselle28 says
No, that is not the response of every monogamous relationship. Almost everyone has needs that can't be met by a partner. My mother likes to travel and my father is horrible and whiny when he's even slightly uncomfortable. My friend likes to watch football and his wife thinks it's a bore. I generally don't date men who like to play video games (or at least not the same games as me). Everyone meets the needs on the list by interacting with people other than their partners. If flirting is something people like to do and neither partner minds, why can't that be a need the people get met elsewhere? Otherwise, large segments of the population would be single by your decree instead of in relationships that make them both happy – and while that might feel good if you're having a pity party, that's not a very good way to set up social rules.
The only person who actually knows about this situation firsthand has clarified why Jay didn't introduce him to her boyfriend, and it sounds like everything is above board. Why do you keep trying to turn this into something terrible when it sounds like everyone involved was following the rules of their relationships and staying within the boundaries of what made them comfortable?
Trixnix says
"Otherwise, large segments of the population would be single by your decree instead of in relationships that make them both happy – and while that might feel good if you're having a pity party, that's not a very good way to set up social rules. "
No, they wouldn't. And a relationship that makes them happy would be one where they get a lot of their needs met and wouldn't need to go searching around to get them met from random other people.
"The only person who actually knows about this situation firsthand has clarified why Jay didn't introduce him to her boyfriend, and it sounds like everything is above board. Why do you keep trying to turn this into something terrible when it sounds like everyone involved was following the rules of their relationships and staying within the boundaries of what made them comfortable?"
Firsthand? But what about biases? Or does Dr Nerdlove not have those?
This is, for all intents and purposes, a PUA lay report. That means it's written from the belief system that you can do some magic tricks and get women to like you when they don't already. It's written from one bias. Jay sounds like she used an excuse to cover up the fact she was flirting behind her boyfriend's back. Look at the behaviour she exhibits.
@kleenestar says
Expecting to get all your needs met by one person is an EXCELLENT way to destroy that relationship. It's also ridiculous to characterize the way most people get those needs met as being from "random other people." People develop relationships with others – yes, even people they meet on the bar scene – and those relationships can nurture parts of themselves they can't express with their partner. You might want to take a look at role theory, or at Donath's work on multiple identities (though her work focuses on online practices).
Speaking personally: my husband and I have an unusually close and successful monogamous relationship, and we still don't expect to get all our needs met by each other.
Mel_ says
If you meant that it's only toxic when people are deceiving each other, you should have said that. What you actually said is that even when both parties are "allowed" it's toxic. And I notice that you haven't bothered to apologize for giving a very clear impression that you were insulting all people who engage in any sort of romantic-ish behavior with people other than their primary partners. That's what a decent person generally does when it's pointed out they've said something offensive, by the way.
Other people have already addressed the fact that people get all sorts of needs met by people other than their romantic partner, generally in totally consensual ways. It'd be easier to believe you actually believe that it's "fine" when "everyone is onboard" if you didn't follow that up with generalizing statements suggesting it's not actually okay.
Trixnix says
@Mel.
Everyone has to find it fun for it to be fun. Much of the posts from other people implied that the only thing that mattered was whether one person involved found it fun.
I didn't/didn't mean to insult anyone here and their romantic practices. I am, however, entitled to my opinion on things as much as the next guy/girl is. If you're going to flirt for fun, you have a responsibility to make sure it is fun for everyone involved.
Mel_ says
I don't see anyone implying that the only thing that matters is whether one person finds it fun–you're the only person talking about that. Everyone else is talking about examples where everyone was in on the fun.
And you still haven't apologized for insulting people, even though you keep claiming you didn't mean to. So is your opinion, then, as you initially said, "In all honesty, a relationship where both parties are allowed to flirt with other people is toxic."? (bolding mine) Because that is what I have a problem with, and you explicitly said it was toxic even when both people agree it's fun and okay.
enail0_o says
"It may be absolutist to think this way but avoids toxic game playing, messy nonsense and mixed messages"
If you think that all it takes is to stick to strict monogamy to avoid toxic game playing, messy nonsense and mixed messages, I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might wish to purchase.
ETA: Also, dangerous? You think that flirting without being willing to have sex (and clearly stating that was the case) makes a person dangerous????
rebootI730 says
And emotionally manipulative, which is a scary, scary way of looking at flirting. Apparently if you flirt and do not have sex with the person you are a terrible person in the world according to Trixnix.
Mel_ says
What's particularly fascinating is that in another recent discussion, Trixnix was essentially blaming women for being romantically mistreated because they supposedly prefer guys who treat them badly. So apparently when a guy strings a woman along or lies to her, well, the woman's obviously flawed in her romantic preferences, but when a guy happily goes along with a woman who's open about what she's up for… the woman is obviously flawed in her romantic behavior. Funny how it's always the woman to blame, even when no one needs to be blamed at all.
rebootI730 says
Huh. Good point. I think it is odd that he thinks DNL was manipulated by Jay when DNL did not feel manipulated, enjoyed his time flirting with her and pretty clearly thinks of her fondly. My guess is that they are still in touch, which is how he got her permission to write this. I do not see the bad guy in this one
Trixnix says
@Rebootl730
I don't want to be rude here or offensive or insulting. I just cannot get why people can't read between the lines on this one.
Jay has a boyfriend who clearly seems not to be in on the whole "she flirts with other guys" thing. Check her behaviour when her boyfriend is around.
Why is she flirting with a guy who is not her boyfriend?
She could dump her boyfriend and sleep with Dr Nerdlove anytime. Why doesn't she?
Are we sure everyone is onboard with her flirting games?
Isn't it just a tad disrespectful to her boyfriend for her to be flirting so much with random strangers when he displays clear signs he's not in on the game?
BiSian says
And I don't get why you keep reading something into this that there's no evidence for.
You, Trixnix, would not want a girlfriend that flirts with other men. Some people would agree with you. Some people won't mind based on the context. Some people would find it hot and encourage it.
Trixnix says
@BiSian.
There's lots of evidence for what I'm saying and I've pointed it out. People are free to disagree, of course. But there is evidence. Look at how Jay behaves for one thing.
BiSian says
I've looked at how she behaved. And I see just as much evidence for other interpretations. Just because you've reached a conclusion doesn't make it the only right possible one.
Trixnix says
@Mel.
Sorry, Mel but something in this whole situation doesn't feel right. Jay's behaviour is dodgy. I'm not saying women are to blame for anything. Jay is acting in a very dodgy way but I'm not victim blaming here. Women go for looks a heck of a lot more than most people think but that doesn't mean they're to blame if they get treated badly. It's just frustrating that lack of looks often prevents decent guys from having the same opportunities as the good looking assholes. That's not women's fault. That's life's fault.
@kleenestar says
Oh, sweet fancy Moses. Let's be clear, Trix: you think of yourself as a decent guy who is getting screwed because he is not conventionally good-looking. But I've seen photos of you, and I get to see your models of human interaction, and neither of these things are true. You're much further from being a decent guy than you are from being good-looking.
enail0_o says
Just want to say that "sweet fancy Moses" is a great exclamation!
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
I wish that were the case because it's not the decent guys consistently getting dates around here.
@kleenestar says
I don't trust your perspective on who is and isn't a decent guy anymore.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
Fair enough.
Mel_ says
Would you please cut it out with the framing of "decent guys vs. good looking assholes"? News flash: Plenty of good looking guys are also very admirable human beings. Plenty of not good looking guys are assholes. The two features are largely unrelated. And you continuing to frame it that way across multiple threads only makes you look more and more like you honestly believe women prefer assholes to decent guys regardless of looks, which is really really disgusting.
Trixnix says
@Mel.
Yes, there are good people who are good looking. But it's also true that many good looking guys behave like assholes to women because they can get away with it thanks to physical attraction and the halo effect. It might be disgusting. But sometimes the truth isn't exactly pretty and it's important to recognize it and not live in PUA land beliefs.
@kleenestar says
Sure, and sometimes guys who think they aren't good-looking act like assholes because they are so caught up in their own selfish misery that they're incapable of empathy or self-awareness.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
Yes. Sometimes that happens. But it's the good looking ones who get the most success.
@kleenestar says
If your point is "goodlooking + awful is more likely to find romantic success than ugly + awful," I don't disagree.
Mel_ says
Many guys that are good looking behave like assholes. So do many guys who aren't good looking. Whether you're behaving like an asshole because you feel you can get away with it or because you're bitter that you don't have things easier doesn't really make much difference in terms of the morality of behaving like an asshole.
And I never denied that "the truth" is some good looking guys behave like assholes. What I denied is that there's a dichotomy of "decent guys not so good looking guys" vs. "good looking assholes". Just because some good looking guys behave badly and may get away with it (to whatever extent) does not mean that women prefer a good looking asshole over a good looking decent guy, so the asshole part is not even relevant to your argument. If you just want to talk about how women are more likely to go for good looking guys, then why do you need to bring the asshole part into it?
Anyway, exactly how many good looking guys who are assholes and successful with women do you personally know? Because it sounds like you're basing all this on the one guy who "stole" that one woman you like, who didn't even treat her like an asshole (just acted like one behind her back). You have other friends who are more successful with women than you are, no? Who you assume are because of their better looks? Do they all treat women badly too, or are they decent guys despite being good looking?
Trixnix says
@Rebootl730.
Okay, can you stop reading that into what I'm saying. I'm not arguing in support of rape here.
If you flirt with someone without checking they find it fun too, that is emotionally manipulative. If you know you're not going to sleep with someone but deliberately set out to flirt with them knowing they want more than you do, that's emotionally manipulative.
Two people have responsibility here. Not one.
@kleenestar says
"If you flirt with someone without checking they find it fun too" – yup, I agree, that's a jerk move.
"If you know you're not going to sleep with someone [who wants to sleep with you] but you flirt with them anyways" – totally fine, assuming you have ascertained that they are interested in flirting with you under those circumstances. The idea that it's emotionally manipulative is VERY CREEPY.
Your idea that flirting implies sex is precisely the same logic rapists use; they just come to different conclusions about what to do about it.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
"Your idea that flirting implies sex is precisely the same logic rapists use; they just come to different conclusions about what to do about it."
No it's not. Flirting can imply many things to many different people. And if you're flirting with someone then you also have a responsibility to make sure they find it fun too.
@kleenestar says
Yes, correct. And what flirting implies to you is the same thing it implies to rapists. I'd be happy to point you to the studies if you're interested, though for obvious reasons they're only looking at one subset of the rapist population.
Mel_ says
How exactly could Jay have more thoroughly "checked" whether DNL found the flirting fun too? She told him she wasn't going to get physical with him, not even kissing, because she had a boyfriend. He then continued to flirt with her and act like he was enjoying it after knowing that. Was she supposed to assume he was pretending and make his decisions about what he was actually okay with for him?
Trixnix says
@Enail.
Yes, dangerous in this context. She's teasing. Consistently saying no but then flirting to make people push up against her boundaries. If you're attached to someone, why flirt with other guys? If everybody is onboard with the situation and not getting hurt, fine. But that's not always guaranteed. Jay could dump her boyfriend at any time.
eselle28 says
It's absolutely fine to flirt and then say no to other things. Flirting isn't some kind of promise.
What if she didn't want to dump her boyfriend? Why do you get to tell her that she needs to? Doctor Nerdlove has clarified above that she didn't introduce him to her boyfriend because he was being an asshole, so it sounds like even the flirting was okay within the context of that relationship. If you don't like that set up, don't participate in it. You don't need to extend your dislike of flirting onto other people's interactions.
enail0_o says
What part of this are you considering dangerous? Teasing is not normally considered a dangerous activity.
Trixnix says
@Enail0_o
It is if the other person involved does not find it fun.
@kleenestar says
"In all honesty, a relationship where both parties are allowed to flirt with other people is toxic."
Well, that's presumptuous and insulting, not to mention intensely disrespectful to people with other relationship models. Are there ways of including flirting in your relationship that are toxic? Sure, but the same is true for basically any other relationship quality.
I think you're aware of how badly this would trigger your insecurity and imagine that other people react accordingly. Not everyone is you, Trix.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
I'm aware of who I am and that the world and other people don't revolve around what I consider to be fun.
I don't mean to be insulting to people who actually do care and respect people and make sure people don't get hurt. This stuff gets messy very quickly and easily has the potential to lead people on. If you're with one partner, surely it's important to focus on that partner and not on flirting with random other guys. Assuming the boyfriend isn't aware of what's going on.
@kleenestar says
No, if you're with one partner then you work together WITH THAT PARTNER to define what's important in your relationship.
As someone in a long-term monogamous relationship it is very insulting that you would tell me what's important in my relationship. My partner gets a vote. You don't. (And it's doubly insulting because, frankly, I'm very goddamn good at monogamous long-term relationships, and as far as I can tell you aren't.)
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
You appear to have missed my point: it's up to you and your partner to make sure that if you flirt with people outside of the two of you, those people find it fun and enjoyable too. You and your partner finding it fun would not be enough. That's not insulting.
I don't get to tell you what's important in your relationship. But if you're going to flirt with others, you need to make sure they find it fun too.
If you open up your relationship activities to include others than it stops being just about the two of you and what you find fun.
@kleenestar says
"surely it's important to focus on that partner and not on flirting with random other guys" <– what you actually said. I don't believe I missed your point at all.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
Well, you would think it a good idea to focus on a partner you're in a monogamous relationship with? Surely? Else what's the point of being with them?
@kleenestar says
Yes, I think it's important to focus on your partner in a monogamous relationship. I think it's also important to have relationships and interests outside of your relationship with your partner. For some people, that includes flirting. For some it doesn't.
BiSian says
Why be with someone if you want to flirt with other people?
Well, because flirting is fun for me. Why should I stop because some people don't approve?
I lead no one on. When I'm in a monogamous relationship, that's literally the 4th or 5th thing out of my mouth when I am flirting with a stranger. They then have the choice to walk away or not. Which some people do–I've had a couple literally turn around and walk away. Shrug.
I hide nothing from my partner–I flirt in front of my partner in fact. And I don't date people who aren't 100% ok with that. (Note: this can take a while to surface and has caused some pretty epic fights in BiSian relationship history)
BiSian says
And must add this:
I am female, which means my Making Friends with Interesting, Fun Person is often mistranslated to Flirting by the dick-ful thinking of some people.
hurrdahurr says
I literally flirt with everyone. It made my husband upset the first month we were together, but he got the idea pretty quickly – I go home with him. He makes my socks go up and down. I am not looking for his replacement. I'd be hiding my light under a table if I stopped flirting with people. That's just how I interact. I could be sullen and not talk to anyone, ever, but that's not me – and incidentally, isn't who my husband fell in love with, either.
Trixnix says
@hurrdahurr
"It made my husband upset the first month we were together, but he got the idea pretty quickly – I go home with him. "
Did the fact that it upset your husband make you think maybe you ought not to do with whilst in this relationship?
" I'd be hiding my light under a table if I stopped flirting with people. That's just how I interact. I could be sullen and not talk to anyone, ever, but that's not me – and incidentally, isn't who my husband fell in love with, either."
So long as he's onboard and happy, fine. It has to be something he finds fun too.
Trixnix says
@BiSian
"Well, because flirting is fun for me. Why should I stop because some people don't approve? "
If everyone is onboard with what's happening, fine. And I get it's fun for you. But is it always fun for other people?
"I lead no one on. When I'm in a monogamous relationship, that's literally the 4th or 5th thing out of my mouth when I am flirting with a stranger. They then have the choice to walk away or not. Which some people do–I've had a couple literally turn around and walk away. Shrug. "
And that's good on your part. I think you do run the risk of leading people on. But you seem to be making an effort to make sure that doesn't happen. Recognizing that just because something is fun for you doesn't mean it will be fun for the person flirting with you.
"I hide nothing from my partner–I flirt in front of my partner in fact. And I don't date people who aren't 100% ok with that. (Note: this can take a while to surface and has caused some pretty epic fights in BiSian relationship history)"
Again, you seem to be actually making sure people are okay with this. Unlike Jay. And this kind of thing can and does cause epic fights which is why I'm making the point I am making. It's hard for this kind of thing not to get emotionally messy.
eselle28 says
It's not always fun for other people…in which case, you can choose to stop playing the game and flirting with the other person. The Doctor knew she had a boyfriend very early on. If he didn't like to flirt, he could have told her to get lost.
You don't know what went on in Jay's relationship. Why do you keep assuming?
Trixnix says
@Eselle28.
Because of Jay's behaviour when her boyfriend is around. It's different to when he's not around.
It's your responsibility to make sure everyone finds your flirting fun. Not simply the responsibility of someone who doesn't like the game you're playing to leave it.
You finding it fun is not enough by itself.
BiSian says
If it's not fun for them, they're allowed to walk away. People aren't trapped into continuing an interaction that they don't like. What's so hard to understand about that?
Trixnix says
@BiSian.
What's so hard to understand that you have a responsibility too since you set the game in motion in the first place. You have a responsibility to make sure what you are doing is fun for all parties involved.. Sure, other people can walk away but emotions ad feelings get messy very quickly.
BiSian says
Also, I'm coming back to add something now that I've had time to process. And that is:
I personally despise the phrase "leading people on," because it has been REPEATEDLY used to shame me for behavior I consider me being friendly and open to a new, interesting stranger. And suddenly–bam! I am a Terrible Person for not wanting to touch his penis.
The nasty reactions I've gotten in this vein are exactly why I am so VERY explicit about what I offer and where I am.
Trixnix, men are humans with their own agency. They are perfectly capable of processing "cute girl who I was chatting with in the bar is not interested in seeing me naked." If a man is not capable of process that and will continue to cling to a woman who has shown the SLIGHTEST interest in him…Well, he has problems that are not my problem. Or the problem of any women ever.
In this particular story, the Doc was not lead on by Jay. Period. He and she were on the same effing page. Whether or not you personally like the idea of being in that specific situation is irrelevant.
And speaking generally: if you get butt-hurt that a women who was talking to you at a social venue (bar, meet up, whatever) turns out to be "taken" you have a great recourse: get over it!
Seriously dude, you WILL end up chatting up women who have BFs–well you will if you ever get over yourself enough to actually talk to a woman you find attractive without being terrified she'll drop you for a hotter model.
Why they are chatting with you will come down to a myriad of reasons (mainly it will be my point about friendly=flirting in the perception of some people). But. It will happen.
You can either continue to be butt-hurt at the very idea, or you can accept that people do things in their romantic lives that you personally won't do. And then move on, pursue people who are compatible with what you want and who you are. And don't be a judgmental a-hole about it.
Seems pretty damn simple to me.
Trixnix says
@BiSian.
"Trixnix, men are humans with their own agency."
Yes, they are. Doesn't excuse a woman from her responsibilities too. Flirting is only fun is everyone finds it fun.
"They are perfectly capable of processing "cute girl who I was chatting with in the bar is not interested in seeing me naked."
Not all of them are. And it's ridiculous to assume that they can interpret things consistently correctly anymore than women can.
"If a man is not capable of process that and will continue to cling to a woman who has shown the SLIGHTEST interest in him…Well, he has problems that are not my problem".
Not true. You have a responsibility to not lead him on. If you're being clear, fine. But don't assume everyone interprets things the same.
"In this particular story, the Doc was not lead on by Jay. Period."
Yes, he was. He wants sex. She doesn't. She continually acts like she will sleep with him but then throws the boyfriend objection back into things again.
" He and she were on the same effing page."
He wants sex. She doesn't. Not the same page.
"And speaking generally: if you get butt-hurt that a women who was talking to you at a social venue (bar, meet up, whatever) turns out to be "taken" you have a great recourse: get over it! "
Because men don't have emotional needs, vulnerabilities and wants and should just "get over it!" ?
"Seriously dude, you WILL end up chatting up women who have BFs–well you will if you ever get over yourself enough to actually talk to a woman you find attractive without being terrified she'll drop you for a hotter model. "
It's not them having boyfriends that's the problem. It's leading guys on. Having a boyfriend and or not being interested is fine. But don't play with someone.
"Why they are chatting with you will come down to a myriad of reasons (mainly it will be my point about friendly=flirting in the perception of some people). But. It will happen.
You can either continue to be butt-hurt at the very idea, or you can accept that people do things in their romantic lives that you personally won't do. And then move on, pursue people who are compatible with what you want and who you are. And don't be a judgmental a-hole about it. Seems pretty damn simple to me."
So I can't have an opinion but people are allowed to flirt with anyone whether the other person finds it fun or not?
Sorry. no. If everyone finds it fun, great. If not, that's bad. I don't think I can point this out any clearer.
@kleenestar says
You claim that not all men are able to understand that "cute girl who I was chatting with in the bar is not interested in seeing me naked."
I'm sure those men exist. They also sound like disturbing creeps who don't appear to see women as human beings, and I am not interested in organizing social behavior to accommodate them. The correct response to a guy who cannot tell the difference between "I am a woman who is talking to you" and "I am a woman who wants to sleep with you" is to keep him away from situations where he might have to interact with women until he develops basic skills at being an adult human being.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
You think that all men can instantly and consistently decipher emotional and social signals easily in every situation?
There's obviously a difference between creeps and normal human beings who can't always tell what is going on in certain social situations.
I wouldn't expect all women to interpret social situations correctly so I'm not going to expect all men to do it either.
@kleenestar says
There's a difference between a guy who sometimes misinterprets signals (totally reasonable) and a guy whose mental model is that talking = wants to get naked (NOT OKAY).
BiSian says
I expect a guy who I've been having a pleasant conversation with to not act like a whiny petulant child when he finds out that I am not interested in sex with him. (Why am not interested is not relevant to him being able to act like an adult).
Of course he is allowed to be annoyed or frustrated or whatever.
Mel_ says
Whoa. Okay, I found the core of your problem!
"She continually acts like she will sleep with him but then throws the boyfriend objection back into things again."
Here's the thing, Trixnix. Flirting with someone is not acting like you will sleep with them. It is acting like you want to flirt with them. Even if a person is single and is actually considering sleeping with a person while flirting with them, they can at any time decide that they actually don't want to sleep with this person and that does not make the flirting somehow a lie or leading the person on. Flirting even among single people is done to get to know the other person and their attitudes in a romantic way. It might help you decide whether you want to sleep with them, but it isn't a way of saying, "Hey, I want to sleep with you." And anyone who assumes that flirting means the person definitely wants to sleep with them is the one in the wrong. This isn't not being clear enough or reading signals badly, this is about having a totally messed up sense of when it is reasonable to assume sex will follow an interaction.
Acting like you will sleep with someone? Is saying, "I want to sleep with you," or some other behavior that's actually part of having sex (e.g., asking if the person has a condom, directing their genitals toward yours with both of you are unclothed). Flirting is not a sign that you definitely want to sleep with someone. Kissing someone isn't a sign that you definitely want to sleep with them. Making out isn't a sign that you definitely want to sleep with someone. Taking off your clothes isn't a sign that you definitely want to sleep with someone. Nothing is "acting like you will sleep with someone" except for actually saying that you will or engaging in the act itself.
The problem is people not understanding that, and thinking that somehow other behavior must lead to sex or it's being led on, not that some people engage in pre-sex behaviors without then following it up with sex.
@kleenestar says
+1000000
Gentleman Johnny says
Here's a clue: if you enjoy flirting with random strangers you meet in bars, don't have a boyfriend. Be single. Of course flirting doesn't have to go anywhere and people have the right to boundaries. But this was game playing and not in a good way.
Or if you're uncomfortable flirting with someone in a relationship, walk away when you find out she has a boyfriend.
rebootI730 says
Seriously. What is so hard about that?
eselle28 says
It sounds like she would have been pretty easy to rebuff too. He was already leaving that first time. The second time they met and she said, “Hey, Mister Pick-Up Line,” he could have said, "I'm only looking to pick up women who don't have boyfriends. Let me know if you lose yours," (or some Doctor Nerdlove version that's actually clever) and moved on. This wasn't something being forced upon him.
Mel_ says
Yeah, the narrative Trixnix is constructing here is uncomfortably close to the whole "men can't help themselves, women must moderate their behavior for them and are responsible for all interactions between them" idea that also gets used to justify all sorts of actually toxic behavior… on the part of men. 🙁
eselle28 says
Yes, exactly. And, just to head off people who talk about women giving soft nos, if he'd been bored and unresponsive to her conversation, it would be on her to get the hint and leave him alone. But given the specific people described, I don't think it would have been too tough for him to tell her to get lost if he'd actually wanted to.
@kleenestar says
Strongly agreed. There's also something here about "flirting implies sex," as if flirting can't be an activity that someone might want to engage in for its own sake.
eselle28 says
Yes. Even as someone who doesn't like flirting when I'm in a relationship or with other people who are, I find that worrying. I mean, I'm single and sometimes I flirt, but that doesn't imply I'm going to have sex with a man I flirt with. Also, most flirting isn't quite as blatant as what was described in the article. What happens when a man thinks a woman is flirting and she thinks she's being pleasant?
Trixnix says
@eselle28.
Flirting does not automatically imply sex. It just does have the potential to lead people on and cause an emotional mess if everyone is not onboard with what's happening, what the rules are etc.
Just because one person finds flirting fun doesn't mean they are given a free pass to flirt with anyone they like regardless of the emotional wants, needs and desires of the person they are flirting with.
BiSian says
I DO actually have a free pass to flirt with whomever I want.
I find your argument problematic. I cannot read people's minds. I cannot know their emotional wants needs or desire or if they are the type of person who is hurt by friendly flirtation that doesn't actually go anywhere. And if said person is going along with the interaction, how the hell am I supposed to ever know?
Also, like I said above, my Friendly is often translated as OMG She Wants to See my Penis.
It seems like you're saying that men will be oh so captivated by my awesomeness that they literally won't be able to leave me alone, no matter how not into the situation they are.
Which is a) not true, b) insulting to men, and c) implies I have succubus-like powers 🙂
@kleenestar says
Damn straight! The amount to which other people are obligated to give a shit about your needs, wants, and desires is context-dependent and relationship-dependent.
What that means is that I think there are contexts where the default is no flirting (e.g. at work) and where the person who would like to flirt needs to be pretty damn sure that the other person is okay with it – but in this case we're talking about a bar, where flirting is quite normal behavior.
Trixnix says
@BiSian
"I DO actually have a free pass to flirt with whomever I want."
No you don't. Other people in the world too.
"I find your argument problematic. I cannot read people's minds. I cannot know their emotional wants needs or desire or if they are the type of person who is hurt by friendly flirtation that doesn't actually go anywhere. And if said person is going along with the interaction, how the hell am I supposed to ever know?
Also, like I said above, my Friendly is often translated as OMG She Wants to See my Penis. "
You seem to be implying that if someone gets the wrong end of the stick then it's automatically their fault. That's a problematic argument. Yes, you cannot read people's minds but that doesn't give you a free pass to flirt with anyone you like. They have to be okay with it first. Otherwise it's you pushing behaviour they find uncomfortable onto them.
"It seems like you're saying that men will be oh so captivated by my awesomeness that they literally won't be able to leave me alone, no matter how not into the situation they are.
Which is a) not true, b) insulting to men, and c) implies I have succubus-like powers :)"
They have a responsibility to stick to your boundaries. You have a responsibility not to lead them on or play with their emotions when they've made clear they don't enjoy your flirting.
eselle28 says
I absolutely have a free pass to flirt with almost* anyone I'd like until I get either a hard or a soft no. I'm very much on the look out for soft nos and take them seriously, and think that other flirty people have similar obligations.
Here, there weren't any hard nos and there weren't any soft ones either. All of the participants enjoyed the interaction. You're imaging yourself being flirted with and not enjoying it, but I don't know why you also can't imagine yourself deciding you dislike this interaction and avoiding Jay in the future. She doesn't seem particularly pushy.
*Subject to the bounds of reason: I'm ethically forbidden from flirting with subordinates at work or clients, no one my age should be flirting with a minor, flirting with relatives is likely to make everyone uncomfortable, trying to pick up someone at a funeral is likely to be considered rude, etc.
BiSian says
I will add that all of eselle's comment is true for me as well. For the sake of brevity, I didn't include all my disclaimers.
eselle28 says
I like kleenestar's description of contexts more than my bounds of reason one, now that I've read her reply to you. There are some contexts in which I think people need to be really, really cautious about flirting (work, the bus). There are some others where flirting is never appropriate (doctor-patient, an adult and a 15-year-old).
But it doesn't seem like any of these even slightly apply here. We're talking about a couple of adults who have no other connection to each other who met at a bar. Seems like a flirting free zone to me until someone gives some sort of a no.
Trixnix says
@Eselle28.
So the free pass comes into effect when they find it fun too. Not before.
"Here, there weren't any hard nos and there weren't any soft ones either. All of the participants enjoyed the interaction. You're imaging yourself being flirted with and not enjoying it, but I don't know why you also can't imagine yourself deciding you dislike this interaction and avoiding Jay in the future. She doesn't seem particularly pushy. "
Dr Nerdlove wanted sex. Jay didn't. At least to begin with. That's two people wanting different things from the same interaction. Jay uses push pull on Dr Nerdlove because she knows he's attracted to her and she does so better than most PUAs can. And her reason for sleeping with Dr Nerdlove was not because she really liked him or cared about him but, as she says: "he didn't give up".
A lot of that sounds very dodgy.
@kleenestar says
DNL himself explicitly said that he wanted TWO things – to have fun flirting, and to have sex with her. He was getting one of those things out of the interaction and seemed happy to continue knowing that was the case. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
At the beginning, he wants more than she wants. They are not on the same page.
@kleenestar says
You've convinced me, trixnix. I should never interact with anyone unless I want exactly the things that they want, and they want exactly the things that I want. If either of us wants something that the other one doesn't, we should not have any further interaction.
(Or wait, let me guess, this "not on the same page" only applies to men who want to have sex with women who are not interested in having sex with them.)
One_True_Guest says
But he was fine not getting sex. He was enjoying just the flirting. Why do you want to deny DNL his fun???? I'm imagining you talking with DNL.
DNL: Oh man she's hot, I so want to nail that girl but she's clearly not interested. So every time we see each other we do this AMAZING flirting. It's fantastic. Too bad she doesn't want to have sex, but the flirting is still totally worth it.
Trix: You have to stop flirting with her.
DNL: Uh why?
Trix: Because you want more from her than she is giving you.
DNL: Yeah, but I mean, I know I'm not getting sex. I really still like flirting with her thought.
Trix: But she's not sleeping with you.
DNL: I know. I don't care. I still love flirting with her. It's hot.
Trix: But she's not going to have sex with yuo.
DNL: I . . . know . . .
Trix: So you have to stop flirting with her.
DNL: But I enjoy it . . .
Trix: But she's never sleeping with you.
DNL: Look man, it's okay. I don't need to sleep with her. I'm cool just flirting with her. It's really okay.
Trix.: Nope. You have to stop. It's not equal.
DNL: What?
Trix: Come on let's go.
DNL: Dude, I'm having fun. I like flirting with her. It's okay that she doesn't want to have sex with me.
Trix: No it's not. It's not fair.
DNL: I guess, but . . . I'm still cool with it.
Trix: No you're not.
DNL: Okay, dude, you know what? I'm just going to go over here now, talk to you later.
Let people have fun how they have fun, Trix. No one is forcing you to do anything you don't want to, stop forcing others to work within your morality.
Mel_ says
Who has said that it's a good idea for someone to flirt with someone else without regards for the wants and needs of the person they're flirting with? That's not what happened in the article (Jay didn't toy with DNL, she made it quite clear what she was up for and what she wasn't) and yet you keep talking about this as if it's behavior that's somehow relevant to the article.
Trixnix says
@Mel.
Jay toyed with Dr Nerdlove a lot. She's also engaging in very suspicious behaviour when her boyfriend is around. If the boyfriend is unaware of her flirting with other guys than she's also disrespecting her relationship with her boyfriend which she claims to value.
That's the evidence I see.
Mel_ says
Telling someone you're okay with flirting with them but not with kissing them, and then proceeding to flirt with them but not kiss them, is the opposite of toying. It's being 100% clear about what you are going to do. Toying would involve some deception or misleading of what you actually intend.
And the boyfriend isn't relevant to how much she was considering the "needs and wants of the person she's flirting with". I agree with you it sounds like she wasn't treating her boyfriend well, but you were arguing she was treating DNL badly too.
Trixnix says
@Kleenestar.
Yes, flirting can be an activity to be enjoyed for its own sake. IF NOBODY IS GETTING LED ON AND EVERYONE KNOWS THE SCORE.
Otherwise, it's gonna get emotionally messy very quickly.
BiSian says
And in this situation, everyone knew this score and no one was being led on.
Trixnix says
@BiSian.
Not entirely true if you look at it in detail.
Trixnix says
@Mel.
No, it's not. Let's put a stop to that right here, right now. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying here is Jay gives off the impression of being a game player and as hard as it is for some to recognize here, that are a few women who get off on messing guys about. That doesn't mean men aren't responsible for their actions or interactions. It means that, like men, you get asshole women too.
eselle28 says
If Jay were an asshole, she would have found some guy who was halfway in love with her and would have kept him around by making vague promises about the future. Instead, she found a PUA in training who enjoyed flirting with her, cheerfully pursued other women, and considered his interactions with her to be positive reinforcement, and then she was very clear and honest with him about what she was offering and what she wasn't.
There are plenty of women who are assholes, but Jay isn't one of them just because she likes to flirt. This is about as ethical as a flirtation gets – clear boundaries and a consenting not-terribly-vulnerable partner.
Trixnix says
@Eselle28
"If Jay were an asshole, she would have found some guy who was halfway in love with her and would have kept him around by making vague promises about the future"
That's kinda what she did do.
"Instead, she found a PUA in training who enjoyed flirting with her, cheerfully pursued other women, and considered his interactions with her to be positive reinforcement, and then she was very clear and honest with him about what she was offering and what she wasn't. "
She kept him around. She sleeps with him because "he didn't give up". He thinks about her most likely more than she thinks about him and he wants sex and she doesn't. PUA isn't real. There's no training that makes a guy more attractive to women using magic skills. A guy is physically attractive to a woman or he's not.
"
There are plenty of women who are assholes, but Jay isn't one of them just because she likes to flirt. This is about as ethical as a flirtation gets – clear boundaries and a consenting not-terribly-vulnerable partner."
Look at how she behaves when her boyfriend is around. Not very ethical.
enail0_o says
She gives the impression of being a game player, yes. But all the people in the situation whose reactions we have enough information to respond to seemed to be enjoying the game. I don't tend to get on with game players myself, but if someone who does wishes to play games with them, what's the problem here, why is that being an asshole?
Mel_ says
Um, yes, Trixnix, when you keep going on and on about how Jay was doing something wrong and encouraging DNL to push her boundaries and leading him on despite the fact that she clearly told him what she was okay with and what she wasn't, and he could have walked away and stopped interacting with her if he wasn't on board, then you are very very clearly insinuating that men are so incapable of controlling themselves that they can't make decisions for themselves around a flirtatious woman even when she's being totally honest and upfront with them about what that flirtation means, and that thus the only responsible thing for women to do is not flirt at all. I'm sorry if you don't like the implications of what you're saying, but they're there whether you like them or not.
I mean, seriously, if you truly believed that this was a toxic interaction, and that men and women are equally responsible for their actions, then why are you completely focusing on how wrong Jay was and not telling DNL he was wrong to continue pursuing her after he knew she had a boyfriend? Hmmm? In fact you have been talking as if his continuing to pursue her was not a choice he was responsible for but an inevitable uncontrollable response to her actions that only she could prevent by not flirting.
Trixnix says
@Mel.
"Um, yes, Trixnix, when you keep going on and on about how Jay was doing something wrong and encouraging DNL to push her boundaries and leading him on despite the fact that she clearly told him what she was okay with and what she wasn't, and he could have walked away and stopped interacting with her if he wasn't on board, then you are very very clearly insinuating that men are so incapable of controlling themselves".
No, I'm not. Yes. Dr Nerdlove could have walked away. But he wanted sex with her pretty bad by the sounds of things so whether he could have rationally walked away cleanly is another matter. But Jay isn't being clear here. She's saying one thing with her words and another with her actions.
"that they can't make decisions for themselves around a flirtatious woman even when she's being totally honest and upfront with them about what that flirtation means, and that thus the only responsible thing for women to do is not flirt at all. I'm sorry if you don't like the implications of what you're saying, but they're there whether you like them or not. "
In this case, her boyfriend is clearly not onboard with the whole flirting with other guys thing. Women are free to flirt. Just not to mess people around. Same with men.
"I mean, seriously, if you truly believed that this was a toxic interaction, and that men and women are equally responsible for their actions, then why are you completely focusing on how wrong Jay was and not telling DNL he was wrong to continue pursuing her after he knew she had a boyfriend? Hmmm? In fact you have been talking as if his continuing to pursue her was not a choice he was responsible for but an inevitable uncontrollable response to her actions that only she could prevent by not flirting."
Oh, I do believe that pursuing her when she said no was wrong. But Jay is saying one thing with her words and another with her actions. Heck, she sleeps with him because he "didn't give up". Not because he left her alone and respected her but because he was persistent. And you see this with a lot of women who end up with guys because the guy was persistent.
PUA isn't real and women decide whether a guy is physically attractive or not not based on some magic tricks. When you're a "PUA in training" (as if there's a master level of PUA), you're exposed to all kinds of beliefs about persistence and how you act influencing how women find you attractive. It's difficult to get out of that mindset.
Mel_ says
"But Jay isn't being clear here. She's saying one thing with her words and another with her actions."
One again, she said the exact same thing with both her words and her actions. She said she was okay to flirt but not kiss (or more) and she indeed flirted but would not kiss or do more with him. How is that unclear? Do you seriously believe that flirting with someone is a signal that you want to kiss or have sex with them even after the person has said, "Flirting is okay but no kissing"? In what possible way could someone be clear that they are flirting without intending more by it if saying outright that they're flirting without offering more isn't enough?
One_True_Guest says
"But he wanted sex with her pretty bad by the sounds of things so whether he could have rationally walked away cleanly is another matter."
You just literally said here that because DNL wanted sex so badly it is a reasonable excuse that he wasn't capable of walking away thus suggesting Jay holds the bigger share of the responsibility in defusing the situation. Because a man who is sexually aroused isn't responsible for his actions.
You literally just wrote that and you know what that implies on a larger scale. I don't think you are actually suggesting that women are responsible for making sure men don't get too aroused or else. But this sentence came from you and suggests you really really need to take a step back and think about your attitude towards women. Because this really suggests that women have all the power and men being sexually aroused by a woman is such a crime that women need to police their own behaviour because men cannot rationally control themselves around a flirty woman. And I believe truly that this attitude is yours. That YOU cannot control yourself around a flirty woman. That maybe unfortunately you have been manipulated in the past by a flirty woman, maybe even used, because you cannot control yourself. And so you assume no man can. That all men are prey to women's charms. And that's why you can't handle flirting, because for you flirting is a power, it makes you helpless.
Maybe that ought to be something you should work on. Not ask all women to police on your behalf.
Trixnix says
@GJ.
That too. But why flirt with someone else if you're in a monogamous relationship with another person? Is that not just a tad disrespectful if the other person isn't in on the whole thing?
eselle28 says
No, it's not disrespectful if the other person doesn't mind. People get to set their own rules for their relationships. My grandparents would have thought it disrespectful none of my boyfriends run around to the other side of the car to open the door for me. I'm sure there are some people who would think it disrespectful for my boyfriends to talk dirty to me in bed and others who would think it disrespectful to even ask for sex before marriage. I don't think those things are disrespectful, so in my relationships, they're not.
Trixnix says
@Eselle28.
But in this case the boyfriend clearly would mind. Or else why is she keeping it a secret. And that "Dr Nerdlove was an asshole thing" doesn't fly. I'm sorry. It sounds like an excuse. It sounds strongly like her boyfriend is not aware she's flirting with other random men. Therefore, if that is the case, it is disrespectful to the relationship she has with her boyfriend.
eselle28 says
He says himself that he was being an asshole. Given that he's the one with firsthand knowledge and that this statement is against the traditional bias of people toward assuming their actions are the right ones, I'm inclined to believe him.
Trixnix says
@Eselle28.
He has a bias like everyone. Look at her behaviour. Is it dodgy or not when her boyfriend is around? And Dr Nerdlove is an asshole about her boyfriend but she can disrespect him by flirting with other guys behind his back when he's not okay with it? Yeah, okay then…
enail0_o says
It's also possible that the boyfriend was okay with her flirting, but not in his presence. We don't know.
Yes, if the boyfriend wasn't okay with it, she would be being a jerk. But since we don't know that, I don't see why it's so important to you to class her as a jerk.
Trixnix says
@Enail.
That's true. But there's something about her behaviour which gives me the strongest impression he's not too keen on her flirting with other guys at all.
Justin Cochran says
My first thoughts upon reading this were "Do people really talk to each other like Kevin Smith movie characters in order to flirt? What's with all the pretending and euphemism? Who on earth thinks of themselves so highly that they speak with other people like this?" It's something I cannot make right in my brain. Why two people who are hot and think each other are hot would bother with all the useless banter when they both know what the endgame is is beyond me. If someone were to drop the "Oh, well now I think you're interesting" line on me I would tell them to fuck off. Everyone is interesting, because everyone is a person with an equal amount of depth and complexity. It's your job to find out why. Not theirs to prove to you that they are, in fact, worthy of your attention. What a stuck up prick this lady was.
Then my second thought was that Doctor Nerdlove got owned on this one pretty hard. You may have been persistent, and "socially calibrated" enough to not piss her off (until you did). But it's pretty clear that she was keeping you around as a fallback in case her relationship didn't work out. She was getting a lot of confidence out of having a guaranteed suitor should things fall through, and you played right into it. I don't see why it deserves to be commended. All you had to do was wait for the walking anachronism to fuck up.
I just don't understand it all, I guess. The whole idea that people bother with all this useless affectation when they know what the end game is perplexes me.
Gentleman Johnny says
http://xkcd.com/592/
Bas Kleijweg says
Because the banter is fun in and off itself. It's exciting because you have to dose the cheek well, has wordplay and amusing overacting.
Justin Cochran says
I don't find the prospect of it interesting or fun at all. In fact it seems fake, like you're trying way to hard to get something out of me.
Mel_ says
That's fine. So you don't enjoy this sort of interaction. Presumably there are things you enjoy that you realize not everyone else in the world does. Surely you can understand that the same premise works the other way too (there are things other people might enjoy even if you don't).
@kleenestar says
So, don't participate! It's no fun for the other person if you aren't bantering back. That makes it easy for you both to find someone who fits your preferred style.
TheWisp says
I'm genuinely curious, what's the alternative in your mind? Most people want there to be some build-up to sex to get in the mood and ensure there is some interpersonal chemistry.
eselle28 says
There are other ways. Not everyone's into adversarial banter. If it's clear it's a romantic/sexual interaction, I generally just talk with people sort of intensely until we start touching each other. If I'm picking up someone in a bar, I generally start by being conversational and end by being kind of direct ("Hey, wanna go back to my place?"). Not everyone does wanna, and that's fine.
That being said, there's nothing wrong with this kind of banter, either, and a lot of people really enjoy it.
TheWisp says
Huh, yeah I can see that. I guess I was interpreting Justin as being perplexed by extended flirting of any kind. As if two people could lock eyes in a bar, chat for a bit, then one says "hey, we both know we're going to have sex, let's just cut to the chase and go to my place."
"Ok!"
Specifically, this line is why I interpreted him that way: "The whole idea that people bother with all this useless affectation when they know what the end game is perplexes me."
eselle28 says
Oh, yeah, I'm not on board with that statement. Many (not all) people including me want there to be some interpersonal connection with even a casual hookup. It's just that there's more than one way to establish it.
TheWisp says
"It's just that there's more than one way to establish it."
I agree, and your model definitely seems to be more appealing to me personally.
LeeEsq says
I've been a few relationships with women that had this sort of banter or pseudo-romantic/sexual flirting. Only one was really enjoyable because it was made clear that its just for fun with no chance of actual sex from the beginning so I didn't get my hopes up. The other two weren't that fun because I thought I had a serious chance and it got cut off before things got actually physical.
LeeEsq says
I suppose my point is that I don't mind this sort of flirting if I have a somewhat good idea of my actual chances before hand. If there is no chance than its just an way to practice a bit sexual wit and conversation and have some verbal fun. If I think there is a chance but it turns out that this wasn't really a possibility in the woman's mind at all than I feel used.
nonA says
One of the nice side-effects of my interest in Steven-Pinker-as-an-evpsycher was exposure to a good deal of Pinker-as-a-linguist. The latter has a lot of good points, when he’s not tilting too far into the reactionary former.
Specifically, subtextual communication carries way more information than strict text. (And to skew slightly evpsych here, does a good job showing fitness. Someone who’s good at both sending and receiving these cues is likely sharper and more socially apt than someone who isn’t.) Thus, there are reasons people enjoy the dance of multi-tiered communication. Just because the point isn’t obvious and explicit doesn’t mean it’s wasteful. In fact, not being obvious and explicit is the whole point.
Gman says
Just like others have already stated here before me, the fact that you don't connect to this bantering type of flirting, doesn't mean that it's "wrong" or that there aren't other types of flirting.
I for example, don't really like the bantering type of flirting too, usually because I suck at it terribly and it usually makes me anxious and drains me REALLY quickly (like I need something like 10 minutes to think of a comeback if someone says something kind of snarky to me). Though sometimes I can be down to such flirting with the right person/mood/context etc, so it's really a fluid concept if you ask me.
Though now that I think about it, what other types of flirting are there? What other kinds of flirting can you guys define/think of that aren't of the bantering type?
rebootI730 says
It pretty much always comes down to bantering, but it can be without the snark and range from silly to mildly serious. One friend and his partner started off with a running joke about him being a do gooder and her being the reincarnation of Ludwig von Rochau at a party (he is in humanitarian aid and she is in foreign affairs with a military slant). I remember the first time they met their banter was silly and funny and had a whole group of people laughing into tears. People that have common interests often spin their banter around those in sort of an "in" joke way. I have seen other flirt banter that was based on making ridiculously long compound words in German.
Flirting is just banter where you are sounding out a person you might want to date/have sex with's personality and seeing how their conversation style and dynamic fits with yours. How it is done is very individual and not everyone is going to like every style, but if you meet someone who has a similar style it can be fun to flirt and a clue that you might be compatible on other levels.
enail0_o says
Hmm, lessee. Playfighting, straightforward saying good stuff about them/to them, over-the-top jokey innuendo, awkward and plausibly deniable hinting (I do not recommend that one), showing deep interest in each other, totally ordinary conversation with lots of moon-eyed gazing at each other… There are a lot of things that I think can be flirting when accompanied with more intimate body language and/or touching but wouldn't be without it.
Gman says
Well, this explains a lot – I realized that I tend to go the "awkward and plausibly deniable hinting" route, because this seems to be the only kind that I can initiate at will. The bantering comes to me at random ocations, usually when I'm feeling more comfortable with someone – so I guess its a way to turn it from random to being able to initiate bantering at will.
Christine says
"Though now that I think about it, what other types of flirting are there? What other kinds of flirting can you guys define/think of that aren't of the bantering type?"
I've tried before (and failed) at describing the flirting that I find intoxicating. I'd call it (for want of a better term) "collaborative storytelling." It starts with one person approaching another, introducing him or herself, and then identifying a story start that involves something in the current environment (something physical that both people can look at and react to). Examples might be: outside/night, pointing out several stars, imagining that they form an unknown constellation, and coming up with the constellation's name and backstory; at a restaurant or bar, noticing a person or couple that neither of you know, giving him/her/them a name, background and life story including why they are there and what they are looking for; outside/day, looking at a cluster of random nearby objects and speculating about who they belonged to and how they got there.
This works for me because it has to be spontaneous, requires creativity, and gives clues to the person's POV and values. It can be as playful, humorous, and sexy as the two people decide to make it. I find it's a great way to get to know someone. (When I've tried to describe this before, others have said they thought this sounded horrible, so definitely not for everyone!)
And, I have to say, I have never known an American man to do this or to respond very well if I try to start it, which I think is why I haven't been interested in American men (not that it couldn't happen). Men from other cultures seem to be more willing to be imaginative in a playful way (in my experience). American men, in my experience, seem to be so focused on money and status that they seem to have a hard time stepping outside that box. I have money, and I have status; what interests me are men who are intelligent and look at the big picture in a creative way, whether that involves science or history or media or literature or something else.
Hope this helps.
@kleenestar says
This is really close to my preferred method of flirting! I actually find that many geeky American guys are (or were, back when I was dating) really enthusiastic about this. It's the more mainstream guys who are like, "Huh?"
Christine says
Yea for kindred spirits! And thanks for the info. Duly noted for future reference.
Gman says
Wow, this actually sounds like a solid idea! Thanks a lot, maybe i'll get a chance to try it out soon 🙂
Christine says
Super! Go forth and have fun, Gman! ;-}
Gentleman Johnny says
I love this although its worth noting that its not just men who have trouble with this sort of thing, which is exactly why I love my fellow geeks. We prize imagination and passion for things outside of the rat race.
Christine says
I hear you. In fact, when I previously tried to describe this, it was sometimes women who commented that it sounded horrible. Important to find the right audience.
@Tricksterbelle says
Hehe, I bag groceries this way when I'm at my cashiering job. There's always a gift card that I fumble that 'wanted to run away and join the circus' or 'the stubborn diva cooking oil with the tiny price tag'. People seem to enjoy it. It's surprising the inconveniences people will overlook when they're entertained. And I don't get bored as often. 😀
Henry Gorman says
Oooh, I did this once on a date (saw a helicopter and heard sirens, then speculated together in increasingly wild fashion about what they were responding to). It was a lot of fun, and it brought us closer together nicely.
adviceowl793 says
I guess this is one of those cases when too much persistence is borderline disturbing and creepy. Soz.
eselle28 says
I don't think creepy's the right word. That implies boundary violations to me, not any behavior that people might disapprove of, and boundary violations don't characterize this set of interactions. Jay actively participated in the flirting, said it was fun, and initiated conversations. Flirting with her wasn't a violation, it was a game they were both playing. I'd say the only boundary issue was insulting her boyfriend, something that was portrayed as a mistake and that DNL apologized for. I actually think that's kind of the point – to show a situation when it's not creepy to keep flirting with someone who isn't (at least in the short term) interested in dating you or sleeping you.
None of that touches on the issue of whether it's right to flirt with someone in a relationship. Sometimes that is wrong, and I think there was a period where this set of interactions was too. But not everything wrong is creepy. That's a particular flavor of wrong.
Trixnix says
@Eselle28.
Jay had a boundary she manipulated someone else into pushing against. That's not respecting her own boundary.
Mel_ says
I don't see that she manipulated anyone. She was quite open about where the boundary was and what she was happy to engage in (flirting) and what she wasn't (kissing or anything beyond that). DNL chose to continue seeing where things would lead knowing that.
And I think she respected her own boundary just fine, given that she enforced it every time he tried to cross it. She (as she pretty much said) was fine with him trying, as long as he stopped at the point she indicated he should.
I think there's a fairly high chance she wasn't respecting her boyfriend's boundaries, given the secrecy issue that came up, but that's a different issue.
eselle28 says
No, she didn't. She had boundaries that she set forth pretty clearly, Doctor Nerdlove (we're not talking about a hypothetical someone, the person whose experiences you're expounding upon is right here) chose to continue to interact with her within the framework of those boundaries. She was respecting her boundaries just fine, and so was he. You just don't like the place that she set them. If he didn't like them, he could have told her to buzz off.
I'm going to note that you're veering dangerously close to rape apologetics.
@kleenestar says
"manipulate"
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
8bit Greyscale says
Wow.
Last time I checked, people are responsible for their own actions. Your comments on this post are very unsettling, Trixnix, to the point where warning klaxons go off whenever I read a new comment of yours.
Your position here is the same basic argument as when people say, "oh sure, she SAID she didn't want to have sex, but look at the skanky club wear she had on! She knows guys'll get turned on and horny. She WANTED that guy to jump her bones and just didn't want to look like a slut." Here, the club-going girl "manipulated" that guy with her sexy club wear into pushing against her boundary of not wanting to have sex. She doesn't respect her own boundary,so why should he?
That emphasized part is the unsaid implication of your argument. Ew. 😐
Marty Farley says
I wouldn't say it's creepy, but I did get uncomfortable reading about this experience and I think it's because of the Game aspect. Like Dr. NL says, you have to be *extremely* socially calibrated to pull this off. Maybe my discomfort comes from being a person that has a lot of trouble reading subtle cues, but the whole "push-pull," "kiss me-don't kiss me" thing makes me feel like we're doing a balance beam routine over a volcano.
Which hey, some folks enjoy-I just feel anxiety-by-proxy witnessing it.
@deguwitharake says
I'm a woman, and I enjoyed reading this. Sometimes a person needs a little incentive to get out of a busted relationship, and I see nothing wrong with flirting with an interested but partnered individual. If she had not been interested, she could have easily stopped flirting with him and told him to leave her alone. Flirtation may seem like a pointless game to some people, but they have not learned to have fun with it yet. Anticipation is fun. A long flirtation gives people time to figure out if the other one is crazy or has some unappealing habits. For some, attraction doesn't happen in one encounter but instead takes awhile to develop. Jay might have found him interesting when they first met, but she was not attracted enough to sleep with him until he proved that he was consistently charming and not secretly a creepy stalker guy. Yeah, I may seem like a game-playing woman, but I've never felt sufficiently attracted to a man to sleep with him the first time we flirt. Consider that other people may experience attraction that works differently than yours. I'd sleep with a guy on our first encounter if I felt the urge, but I never have. Attraction, for me and for many other women, develops with time. I've never once seen a photograph of a human and thought, "I want to fuck that person regardless of his/her character, habits, behavior, etc."
I don't see how Doctor Nerdlove "got owned" here. He didn't want to date her, and he said so directly in the article. He wanted to enjoy the flirtation and ultimately sleep with her. He got exactly what he wanted, as it was presented in the story. What's wrong with giving the woman some confidence? He was getting the same out of the flirtation. Sure, a lengthy flirtation can be frustrating, but it is worth it in the end if the thing is finally consummated (and it was).
Bwmn says
I'm also a woman and enjoyed reading this. Not for the specific situation, but the general ideas of the article I really related to. I mentioned up thread that trying to date someone with an incredibly busy schedule that was also completely opposite to mine, played out in a way that had similarities to this. Mostly because if I hadn't been persistent, things would have completely died after the first date. However trusting the interactions we had as being really positive and then accepting being more of the initiator, ultimately got me past what at some points initially felt like rejection.
I think that the most important part of either situations of persistence or 'flirting as a means to an end' is being able to personally calibrate "am I getting oneitis", "is this becoming hurtful or upsetting to me", and "is the other person actually just fading away".
eselle28 says
That's a good point. I think this angle might also work with someone who's said they're not up for [whatever kind of relationship] right now but who's given some similar signs of being open to ongoing flirting.
TheWisp says
I'm not sure why people have a problem with this story. I read it as two people who negotiated a relationship that included verbal flirting and physical closeness, but explicitly did not include kissing or sex. DNL did test to see if Jay was open to changing the boundaries, but in a non-pressuring way that Jay was okay with. And then, one day, Jay was open to letting the relationship going further, so it did. DNL didn't harass her, she was clearly enthusiastic about what was going on, DNL didn't get oneitis for her, and he apologized for his one big mistake (mocking her boyfriend).
I understand a lot of the women who frequent this site wouldn't be turned on by such behavior, but just because it's not your cup of tea doesn't mean it is therefore problematic.
Besides, the women who wouldn't be turned on by such behavior wouldn't have behaved around DNL the way Jay did, anyway. They probably would be much colder.
eselle28 says
My reaction is primarily because I'm on the fence about whether this is the story about a relationship that allowed flirting or one that did not but where one partner was seeking some affirmation from flirting because the relationship was flailing.
I'm puzzled why you're framing your second and third paragraphs in terms of the women who frequent this site. I'm seeing objections from both men and women, with some very strong ones coming from some male commenters. Trixnix, Lee, Justin, and adam have all voiced discomfort with the story. Why make this about gender wars if that's not the way the comments are headed?
rebootI730 says
I was wondering the same thing. More men seemed to object to this article than women.
TheWisp says
You're right, I shouldn't have gendered it (I think the first comments I read here were by women when I first checked in here this morning, so that might have colored my perceptions). I think the gist of those paragraphs applies to the men, too (i.e. your preferences =/= morality). I actually didn't read trix's comments until you posted this, and yeah, those were really extreme…
LeeEsq says
Another problem with this sort of persistence technique is that it flies in the face of taking rejection gracefully. For most people "I have a boyfriend" or the equivalent is a pretty big signal of rejection even if combined with signs of romantic and sexual interest and gestures to continue the seduction.
hurrdahurr says
I think it could be argued that he did, in fact, take it gracefully. He didn't pout, he didn't whine, he didn't demand she immediately dump her boyfriend and lose her panties. He was less-than-graceful about needling the boyfriend in front of her, but otherwise, he didn't cross her boundaries and didn't try to emotionally manipulate his way past them, either.
ZevSong says
I'm sorry, but this whole article is so jarring, so far removed from everything that Dr. Nerdlove has posted before. It almost makes me feel like someone has hacked the site or something and posted this.
I get that this is a story from his PUA days, but it seems so WEIRD that after all he has posted about respecting women, and backing off when a women says things like "I have a boyfriend", that he would be using this specific story as an example of "being persistent" that flys in the face of all that.
After so much about how to avoid being creepy and how society teaches men that a women saying no to a man really means "No until you can change my mind", this story seems to backspace on everything posted before and say: "Yeah, women love persistence! Even if she has a boyfriend, just keep on it and wedge yourself into her life and she'll eventually come to you nice and horny once she eventually leaves that boyfriend".
I am so disappointed, this blog has always been a wonderful beacon of hope for me and now I'm going to be second guessing every future post. Again, I get that the point was to teach about healthy persistence, but this was a horrible way to do it.
Bas Kleijweg says
"Women love persistence"=/="Read her signals, trust them when they point to yes, realize there are a truckload of degrees between 'does not want anything to do with you' and 'is madly in love with you', with such variations as 'down to flirt', 'not now because I have stuff going on in my life' and 'only after we have a chat with my partner how we're going to navigate this poly construct' "
"Wait in the wings until she's DTF"=/="You can enjoy flirting for its own sake, couples have different degrees of openness and don't get hung up on a single gal"
It's like people skip over half the sentences of her agency and affirmations. The analysis parts clearly show if 'she does X, then do Y', leaving the ball in her court. The rest of the blog is pretty 101 most of the time, this article(like his how-I-met-my-wife article) requires somewhat closer reading. It's not that hard, I'm sure.
enail0_o says
Judging from the responses to some of the 101 posts, I think for some people it is quite hard to tell the difference in action. I don't think that means he should never post more advanced and nuanced topics, but I do feel like it would work better if it were clear that this isn't suitable for people working on 101 skills. Not the first time I've felt like this site could use a skill sheet and leveling system, with each post tagged with the appropriate level.
Marty Farley says
I actually think that's a great idea. I'm a fan of NerdFitness*, and he structures quite a lot of his articles that way-Level 1 cooking skills, "dungeon" workouts that slowly increase in difficulty, stuff like that.
Trixnix says
@Enail.
PUA isn't real. It's more a belief system than a set of actual skills that do anything. He stuck around until she didn't have a boyfriend anymore and then got with her. With respect, that's not very advance. She was attracted to him or she wasn't. Not much he could have done about that.
eselle28 says
He could have done a bunch of things to make himself less attractive to her. He could have been jealous or possessive more than that once. He could have not respected her boundaries and hounded her to have sex with him, instead of accepting the boundaries she set and only doing those things she agreed were okay. He could have stopped pursuing other women and developed oneitis.
There were a lot of ways he could have screwed this up, and I think it's a pretty good advanced guide to how to interact with a woman who's interested but taken. For people who aren't past 101, I'd say leaving her alone is a better option.
Trixnix says
@Eselle28.
She was attracted to him physically. That's outside of his control. Being jealous, possessive etc might have decreased her attraction to him but probably not by much if she were physically attracted to him.
Screwed this up? With respect, this was just random chance not the result of some magic plan or set of skills. He only gets to sleep with her when she finally drops the boyfriend which shows it's her choosing to have sex with him not the other way around.
PUA isn't real. I respect Dr Nerdlove and the advice he gives and, with respect, in this example, he waited till she hadn't got a boyfriend and said yes to sleeping with him and then she slept with him. The woman was in charge here.
eselle28 says
Oh, good grief, Trixnix. You're letting your personal struggles and biases interfere with your ability to assess the world around you to a very severe degree here. This isn't a story about how physical attraction conquers all. It's really not, and if you are reading it this way, I think it may be time for you to talk to someone professionally about how to get past these biases (I know you're a therapist yourself, but there's nothing wrong with a therapist seeking therapy).
For whatever it's worth, it's entirely possible for a man to be physically attractive to a woman but to completely turn her off with his behavior. It happened lots of times with your meetup group buddy, who finally found a girlfriend but completely creeped out a bunch of women before then. It almost happened to a man I went out with recently – and the only reason it wasn't a complete dealbreaker was that I had a couple of dates worth of very positive behavior to weigh against one shitty comment and decided it was worth it to see how sincerely he believed in the statement made in the shitty comment. It could have really easily happened to The Doctor. If he'd been as much of a jerk as he was the time her boyfriend was around, she would have stopped flirting with him entirely and found someone else to be her rebound fling.
Mel_ says
Oh wow. Just when I thought it couldn't get worse!
No, Trixnix, most women are not okay with guys acting jealous, possessive, insulting, hounding, and so on just because the guy is physically attractive. Women turn down good looking guys who behave in unpleasant ways all the time. It's ridiculous that you'd even claim this given that even you admit that the guy who know who creeps women out sometimes has had less success than you with women. Presumably because of his behavior, since you believe he's much more good looking than you.
Women are not solely in charge of whether they get together with a guy. The guy has just as much control over the situation. He can decide not to pursue the relationship. He can decide to do things that make the woman more likely to want to see him again or less likely. There are a huge number of things that can make a woman lose interest or trust that have nothing to do with looks. I don't care what you think about PUA–expressing this as a general belief, which you have repeatedly in other contexts as well, is an incredibly problematic way of thinking.
enail0_o says
I actually am less concerned about whether the skill set DNL is demonstrating here contributed to her deciding to sleep with him than I am with the fact that it allowed him to find a way of interacting with her that they both enjoyed and that respected her boundaries, when it would have been very easy for someone interacting in a similar way to make her uncomfortable. It's a more nuanced social interaction than many people could pull off successfully (with successful = mutually enjoyable experience).
Christine says
Thanks for posting, ZevSong. I, too, am flummoxed by this article. Not sure I get the take-away. It feels like:
For women:
Laydeez, if you have great T&A, feel free to string along guys for giggles and ego-strokes, 'cause even tho guys claim they don't want game-players, they'll be panting with excitement to get crumbs of attention from the hot chix.
For men:
Guys, no might mean no, or it might not mean no, so, y'know…
Of course, it didn't help that I heard the entire article in the voice of Austin Powers (Yeah, baby! Shagalicious!). Really not getting it. Or maybe I'm just having a blonde moment.
rebootI730 says
There was also the not fixating on her despite the clear attraction and flirting and avoiding oneitis. Then there was respecting her boundaries and enjoying the relationship that was available. DNL enjoyed her flirting style and wanted to keep the interaction going even though sex was not on the table in the near term.
I can see how this would be hard to get if you do not enjoy flirting for the sake of flirting, but some people do enjoy it even if it never goes anywhere.
RobinJ says
I don’t think this is about “not enjoy flirting for the sake of flirting”, but about the fact that she already was in a relationship. She didn’t want her boyfriend to know that she was flirting with someone else. So it was actually something which wasn’t acceptable to him.
I enjoy flirting just for fun too, but when I agree with my boyfriend not to flirt with other people, and then he still flirts with another girl, then he breaks a bond of trust.
(btw sorry for my english 😉
Trixnix says
@rebootl730.
With respect, there's still an undercurrent of "get a no guys? No worries. Stick around and see what happens". Yes, he respected her boundaries. But it's persistence where a clear no was given.
eselle28 says
She said yes to flirting and no to kissing and sex. You seem to think that he needed to stop flirting…but why? She's a grown woman. It doesn't sound like she was drunk out of her mind or confused or unsure. Why can't she consent to some things but not others?
Trixnix says
@eselle28.
She says yes to flirting but she knows it won't go anywhere. Dr Nerdlove clearly has more of an agenda than actually just enjoying the flirting. He wants to sleep with her. She is consistently asking him to push up against her own boundaries. She's teasing.
@kleenestar says
Yes, she knows it won't go anywhere – and she makes that clear to him. He can either enjoy the flirting for what it is, or walk away. The whole article is about how he dealt with the fact that he wanted more than just flirting in a reasonably healthy way, and still found a way to participate in the kind of relationship she was willing to have.
Also seriously did you just say that she was asking him to push her boundaries? She made her boundaries goddamn clear and enforced them in a polite and friendly way. If that's your read of what flirting means then dear lord please do not date.
eselle28 says
No, she's not teasing. She told The Doctor exactly what she wanted. That is the opposite of teasing. He can have whatever agenda he wants, but it's his decision if he wants to continue flirting with her knowing what her boundaries are. He doesn't seem unhappy with the results. She doesn't seem unhappy with the results. Why are you trying to force a couple of people who were both okay with the rules of the game they were playing to play by your rules instead?
SadisticToaster says
" A little older than me but . . . " : Was this necessary? I understand that at the time you were into PUA – and they're not a group which approves of women being over 20, but you've moved on from that now.
"A little older than me *and* dressed to impress with a blue sparkly number that showed off an ass like damn and breasts like phwoar." would have been a far better sentence.
_Johannes_ says
Of course Jay liked this kind of persistency. By that she could build up a backup lover and then drop her boyfriend. Quite comfortable, isn't it?. Personally as a man I am not available for games like that. I still have some self esteem.
No woman on earth is worth such a persistence. The only reason I could think of why someone would do things like that is, that someone simply likes playing games like that. But to me, life's far too short to this sort of games.
AnonotronX says
Doc, don't let this "redeem PUA lingo/my PUA past" thing become a habit. I didn't like that last article about demonstrating value, and this isn't making things any better. I can appreciate that there are some nuanced things to learn from reflecting on these kinds of personal stories, but its clearly going to be a fraught endeavor to write about them for this audience. I agree that maybe you should really put some disclaimers on this kind of stuff so that the subtler ideas aren't lost on people, but is it *really* that worth it in the first place if that's what you have to do?
You're one of the best writers there are for nerdy folks who want to improve themselves and their lot in life, DNL. Don't squander your credibility on gambles like this.
Trixnix says
Since we've already had the "You're not suitable to be in your job" comment, I'll stop replying to people on this page. I think comments about whether I'm a decent guy or not are not relevant to this topic and questions about my career are, once again, out of order. I respect that people disagree with me. I just don't share the main opinion of people on here. I don't believe in PUA. You're either physically attractive to a woman or you're not. I don't believe it fair to flirt with someone behind someone's back (when they are unaware of what's going on), I'm not in favour of people playing games with people who don't want to play games and I believe people flirting with people should be careful to make sure everyone enjoys it.
If that's controversial stuff then fair enough.
@kleenestar says
What's really disturbing about this conversation is that you seem to have no idea about the creepy ideas you are actually expressing as you attempt to express very reasonable ideas like "make sure everyone involved in a flirtatious interaction is enjoying it."
Mel_ says
If you don't want people making comments about whether or not you're a decent guy, maybe stop bringing up the idea that you're a decent guy as part of your arguments? Using a "fact" as some sort of evidence and then getting upset that other people might challenge that "fact" isn't really fair.
And the one person who made a comment about your career had that comment deleted by a mod and was reprimanded for it.
Dr_NerdLove says
OK, I think we've officially hit the point where everybody is talking 'round and 'round in circles and getting absolutely nowhere. Trixnix has said he's bowing out of the situation, and we're basically reiterating the same things.
So in the name of everyone moving on (and not having yet one more spam-catching comment section) I'm going to close comments here.