This guy asked me to the movies..but something he said bothered me

[annie24]

if you are turned off, for sure, move on.

 

you aren't her gyno? really? omg. what a nutter.

[FathomFear]

It sounds like he was being very honest. I'd take that over those types of people who pretend to love everything you like.

[candykisses]

If a guy says to me on a movie date that I better "...pay for that crap" (with "crap" referring to a movie he does not want to see), then I would have left lol. Yes I'm that conceited. It's like excuse me, YOU asked me out on a date. If I want to see a comedy, then we're seeing a comedy. 'Cause the other alternative is I not showing up to the date in the first place =)

[candykisses]

He sounds like he missed that day in kindergarten where basic manners were taught.

 

LOL I agree. What a loser.

[ImNotYourBabe]

It sounds like he was being very honest. I'd take that over those types of people who pretend to love everything you like.

 

if he didn't love the movie thats fine..but calling it crap is normal? I don't think so.lol

[BriarRose]

if he didn't love the movie thats fine..but calling it crap is normal? I don't think so.lol

The guy has no class whatsoever. Probably doesn't even think there was anything wrong with what he said.

[candykisses]

^Yup. I would have left to go shopping.

[ImNotYourBabe]

^Yup. I would have left to go shopping.

 

This made me giggle...

[lavenderdove]

The guy is rude has no social skills...

 

An idiot too, if he thinks talking about how great some celebrity's ass is will impress a date...

[bulletproof]

I have a relatively thick skin for humor, but his comment wasn't really funny. It was just stupid and negative. He could have made the same point a bunch of different ways that were way more clever and lighthearted if he wanted to tease you about your taste in movies.

[TouchNastY]

This should shed some light:

 

 

Sounds like Homes has been reading too much link removed and Roissy and went overboard on the negs. Are you prototypically attractive? If so, his gameplan entailed teasing and "negging" in a bid to knock you off-center and make him seem different and non-supplicating (in a good way of course, though it seems to have backfired). It works in a sense, but the delivery has to be on point. There's another key component:

 

From what I took away on your end, you weren't even attracted to him initially, as this approach will come off as perversely charming if the target (you!) IS interested. If the target isn't interested, then the tactic generally fails and the negs are relegated to ammo against his personality (enter previous posts). He's not so much a bad guy as he is rusty with his game and unfortunate that he didn't realize you're not interested in him enough for that to have worked.

 

Save yourself (and him) the time, because you're not interested. I say this, because it would have been attractive were you interested. Sounds a little trite, but truly think about it, bearing in mind that attraction is the criterion we use to separate funny from lame, bold from creepy, charming from crass, etc.

He tried, albeit a bit poorly, and your lack of attraction thusly pegged him under the latter categories.

[candykisses]

lol well if his intention were to stand out to the OP then he succeeded......in a bad way.

 

I had a male friend who was wholeheartedly into the whole "neg" thing you are enlightening us with. He let me in on his "secrets" one day when I asked him for advice about a guy situation that ironically, had completely nothing to do with the "neg" thing. If this guy was indeed using the "neg" thing, then he failed because whatever it is he was doing, he wasn't funny to the OP. At best it reminds me of the time in elementary school when boys used to pull on girls' pigtails because they liked them. It's dumb at best and immature at worst.

 

Guys who have stood out to me were the ones who were funny but chivalrous and well-mannered. The ones who were rude only stood out to me in a bad way.

[TouchNastY]

"Guys who have stood out to me were the ones who were funny but chivalrous and well-mannered. The ones who were rude only stood out to me in a bad way."

 

Little curious about this: were you initially attracted to them (likely physical aspect, as that is what is presented first), and thus found their behavior to be "funny but chivalrous and well-mannered" because of said attraction, whereas the ones deemed rude had no a priori attraction, leaving them to stand out in a bad way?

 

Meaning:

I am attracted -> he does something -> it, and therefore he, is funny because I'm attracted

I am not attracted -> he does something (same thing) -> it, and therefore he, is rude because I'm not attracted

 

 

Someone could say something as benign as "Hey, how are you?" or even just smile at a woman, and if she isn't attracted to him, he'll be relegated to annoying creep status. Not really his fault, nor hers if she's not attracted, but that's what happens. If the woman is attracted, the man can push a little further and even get away with more social indiscretions so-to-speak (like heavy teasing and inappropriate convo re-framing). It's not the negging that fails, rather failure by the man to recognize into which category he's been put (to which the man is often ignorant) that fails.

 

Check this:

This (were she not interested) easily could have read: "There's a chauvinist who always approaches me when I just want to do my workout. He's always leering at me, and waiting for me to finish. I meet these creepy guys all the time, and now there's one at my gym." And all the subsequent posts would have been like "yea, he IS creepy, what the hell." I mean...you get the point. It's the attraction that dictates how the actions are interpreted.

 

 

This isn't about proving anybody right; just exploring into greater detail the attraction algorithm. It may oversimplify a few things for sake of clarity, but is fairly interesting and enlightening once fleshed out. As for I'mNotYourBabe: again, you're not attracted to him, which isn't your fault, so find another prospect to whom you are attracted.

[HaleyC.]

thats a sad story. i think thats rude too. i would probably leave. im sensative.

[ImNotYourBabe]

I wasn't attracted to him so you're right. Is this some new thing or something? Whenever I laughed he would try to pinch my knee or tickle me to make me laugh harder. This other guy tried that with me recently too! Its so gross.

[TouchNastY]

For showing him that his comings-on are not welcome since you're not attracted to him, I suggest using closed body language (crossed arms/legs), body disorientation (point away from him, or distance your body), briefly avert eye contact, or steal the conversation frame. Sounds like he's a PUA apprentice, and this will definitely set off the klaxons for Not Interested signals. You may already be doing these things (sub)consciously, but making them more pronounced may help - and while this may not discourage him, it should make your negative response all-the-more clear. [Also couldn't go wrong with "the hell you doing?"]

 

Hopefully you'll meet a guy whose advances you will welcome.

Just remember it's not so much the actions that turn you off as it is he who is performing them.

 

 

 

As an aside: for intel, check out AskMen, Roissy's website, or just google "PUA," and you'll find what a lot of men use as foundation for their game. At its heart, it's teaching social skills, but some extrapolate it to the absurd. This is likely what you're encountering.

[G-Snap]

I think the movie comment was a joke. Talking about the curves on certain celebs, however, with a lady you are just beginning to date, that was the thing I find to be offputting.

[G-Snap]

For showing him that his comings-on are not welcome since you're not attracted to him, I suggest using closed body language (crossed arms/legs), body disorientation (point away from him, or distance your body), briefly avert eye contact, or steal the conversation frame. Sounds like he's a PUA apprentice, and this will definitely set off the klaxons for Not Interested signals. You may already be doing these things (sub)consciously, but making them more pronounced may help - and while this may not discourage him, it should make your negative response all-the-more clear. [Also couldn't go wrong with "the hell you doing?"]

.

 

 

What the heck? this sounds as shifty as PUA tactics. Why not just TELL the guy there is no interest vs sending off all of these beligerent body cues? That's really as silly as being a PUA.

[candykisses]

Haha I'll respond 'cause hey, you seem interesting and I kinda like you =)

 

hehe, nope -- if Mr. GQ material did the same "negging" (and if considered the social context such negging equates to RUDENESS rather than light-hearted bantering), then I would not find it funny just b/c he did it and not some other less attractive guy. I obviously don't know if the guy in the original post was joking or not 'cause I wasn't there, only the OP was and she mentioned that he made her feel uncomfortable, so without a lot of other contextual details, my best guess would be that he was just a rude person. If I'm wrong, then I must be reallly spoiled 'cause I've ever only been treated like a princess on a date. So back to your question, I value appropriate behaviour above looks so my eval. of a guy's social skills is not contingent upon whether I find him attractive or unattractive, physically. 'Cause that would be too simplistic for me. Manners are manners. I can recognize it blind, just the same.

 

I feel like we should make a distinction though between:

 

1. Random hit-on's/pickups. I will admit my judgment is coloured somewhat by the guy's physical attractiveness. But only initially. The rest is body language, mannerisms, etc. that determines substantially whether I write him off as creepy or not. I've actually written about this in another thread before. So for reference:

 

2. Guys I already know.

-- looks don't matter one bit. I remember turning down a very persistent, attractive guy (like, a 10/10) all 'cause uhhh, he couldn't spell. Or if he could, he was hiding that basic ability in order to appear more "gangster" -_- Soooo, given how picky I am, would I find rude "negs" funny just because I am attracted to a guy? Like, are you kidding? NO! Unless he actually IS funny! =) In which case, I can tell 99% of the time whether he jokes or is actually just a ill-mannered person. If I wanted a 10/10 who's a c0cky douche, I can have one by tomorrow. But why would I want a c0cky douche?

 

 

I think your point was, if a comment is ambiguous then attraction might play a role in how I interpret it. But if a comment was truly ambiguous, then I don't see why I wouldn't give the same benefit of the doubt to a guy I'm not physically attracted to, unless I were the type of presumptuous person who just likes to look for reasons not to like other persons on the basis of their appearance. I think to most women, appropriate social behaviour matters to a much greater degree than looks. In a hit-on/pickup situation, for a guy to receive non-creep status (and this is speaking for myself) it would take a lot more than attraction on my part, lol.

 

 

Hope that helps. Of course, this is just one girl's perspective.

[TouchNastY]

Hey G-Snap,

My comment was germane to:

 

"Whenever I laughed he would try to pinch my knee or tickle me to make me laugh harder. This other guy tried that with me recently too! Its so gross."

 

Most of the said actions (regarding my comment) are automatic subconscious responses, and I was suggesting making them more pronounced, perhaps in tandem with articulating distaste as you made mention. I find body language the more important of the two (compared to vocalization), as words often belie our true feelings. The knee pinch/tickle is his initiating "kino," which is in his playbook for escalation, and if she's not feeling it, merely saying "No" with ambiguous body language will not stop his play. Negative body language is paramount in conveying the definitive No, even if what is said does not coincide. Of course, one could always couple the closed body language with a "Go to hell" for full effect.

 

 

 

 

 

Holla candykisses! - *does U-turn*

 

It sounds like you're saying that ambiguity is something intrinsic to a comment, the response to which is not dictated by your physical attraction to the commenter, but rather by their manners (or lack thereof). Meaning the native ambiguity of the comment is a binary function of the presence of manners, rather than physical attraction.

 

Interesting turn of events then: your algorithm seems to reinforce that attraction to someone IS a binary dichotomy [redundant?], though the discriminating factor may vary (e.g. physical attractiveness, or in your case, social grooming). Though isn't social grooming a constituent of "attractiveness," just as physical attraction is? So, in essence, how something is interpreted is still a contingency of the summation that is "attractiveness," no?

 

 

 

"...would I find rude "negs" funny just because I am attracted to a guy? Like, are you kidding? NO! Unless he actually IS funny!...."

 

This actually confused the shti out of me. Perhaps it's a semantic argument in which you define "neg" as a distasteful joke (made distasteful due to lack of attraction by lack of manners, as per your algorithm? thus his joke was distasteful because he is lacking in manners? or because it wasn't funny, in which case manners is extra to, and not part of, the decision that it wasn't funny? but that implies someone to whom you are attracted could deliver a "distasteful joke"...yet what would you call that, if not a neg? [ed. I think I dissected too far]), but it seems that whether the comment is perceived as "neg" or "joke" is contingent upon your attraction (which, as you say, is dictated binarily by social grooming). So basically, if it's not funny (because you're not attracted? or does the lack of attraction stem from the non-funniness as well as the lack of manners?), you consider it a "neg," and if it is, it's a "joke" and he's funny? So someone to whom you're attracted couldn't technically deliver a neg, as it would be classified as a joke? Hmm. You're pretty complicated.

 

An aside: I think we misunderstood each other, as I believe PUA [i'm not PUA] takes "neg" to mean simply a teasing hit, which may or may not meet with positive reception, whereas you deem a negatively-received comment a "neg."

 

 

There wasn't really any point to this, just curiosity. If you take anything away, just remember that spelling and being a G aren't mutually exclusive. Playin.

[candykisses]

 

 

There wasn't really any point to this, just curiosity. If you take anything away, just remember that spelling and being a G aren't mutually exclusive. Playin.

 

Hehehe, you are awesome. I love you! Seriously. You are refreshing. like a breath of fresh air. (See men, what I mean by looks don't matter?)

 

I will conjure up a response after I am done with this paper for school, I promise =)

[candykisses]

“I think we misunderstood each other, as I believe PUA [i'm not PUA] takes "neg" to mean simply a teasing hit, which may or may not meet with positive reception, whereas you deem a negatively-received comment a "neg."

Then we misunderstood each other the whole time. It’s been years since my friend told me about “neg” theory so I’ll take anything =b Alright so a “neg” is simply a teasing, put-down kind of comment. I’ll assume then, that it’s gotta be delivered in a joking, playful way...such that it’s not actually a put-down, bonus points if it’s funny. Eg, if the guy in the OP’s post had said what he said (the movie comment) but in a joking tone and with a big smile on his face. And depending on what movie it was, it might actually be funny =D But even then, he might not be able to come accross as funny. Not every guy has the social ability/skills to be humorous and charming.

 

If that’s what a “neg” is, then I must “neg” the guys I know alll the time, lol. I must be the female equivalent of a PUA. Oh wait, I already am. I am told that I am a female pimp/maneater =s Then, I’d be socially retarded not to know when I am having game thrown at me by a confident, alpha male. Taken context into account, I would know for sure then when a guy is simply “negging” me...unless he fails miserably, miserably at it, in which case I’d then have to make up my mind about whether his comment was simply a failed attempt at being interesting and unique, or if he’s actually just a rude doucheSpeedy...no?

 

How I make up my mind in that situation would depend, almost entirely, on what other things I know about him, his behaviour accross situations, his manners, etc. I wouldn’t think, under normal + sober circumstances, that’d hard to decipher at all. UNLESS (your original point, I see) the woman is so blinded by her attraction to him and her own hormones that she just gives the benefit of the doubt and quite possibly, lets him get away with a lot more than she would w/a guy she doesn’t find attractive.

 

I took your original algorithm to mean that “attraction” meant physical attraction, because it seems to imply that attraction precedes judgement.

Fig. 1

“Meaning:

I am attracted -> he does something -> it, and therefore he, is funny because I'm attracted

I am not attracted -> he does something (same thing) -> it, and therefore he, is rude because I'm not attracted”

 

Again, (not sure about other women) that kind of causalistic thinking would not be my thought process (when sober, at least..........) Whether I find him funny vs. rude would depend on whether or not he is just an ill-mannered person overall (which involves a myriad of factors), because I don’t base my judgment on looks.

 

Back to “negging,” it actually is a quadratic (inverted U) relationship for me, hehe. With ability to "neg" as the IV; attraction as the DV. Too little/don't know how to neg and he bores me, too much/overdone and he risks coming accross as weird and annoying and quite possibly, have it backfire as rude. Moderation/striking that fine balance is key =)

 

 

BTW, you really amuse me.

[TouchNastY]

"But even then, he might not be able to come accross as funny. Not every guy has the social ability/skills to be humorous and charming."

 

I'd say this is the crux of the thread. Once you understand the other side's playbook, their moves can be telegraphed from a mile away - it's like looking over their shoulder while they're in the planning stage and feigning ignorance (or, if undesired, pre-emptively acting against it) once put into action. Endearing in a way when the delivery does fail, as you can see that there really isn't any ill intent, just...much room for improvement.

 

 

 

"...I’d then have to make up my mind about whether his comment was simply a failed attempt at being interesting and unique, or if he’s actually just a rude douche[]...."

 

There's always an unknown element; you have good guys with successful attempts (real deal), good guys with failed attempts (shy/inexperienced), rude guys with successful attempts (tight game, but players), and rude guys with failed attempts (two-for-one Fail). One can't always make a fully-informed decision, though precautionary measures can be taken. You mentioned behavior assessment over a period; I can see this for a new acquaintance, but what about that perfect stranger in the check-out line? Or on the subway? You'd have to take a plunge there. It does place unnecessary weight on the first impression, and I'm sure many people of dubious intentions would take great advantage of that in playing the part. At the same time, it's just as easy to foul up the first (and, in this instance, last) impression and become the immutable object of great derision [can't make the call on homeboy, as I wasn't there, but sounds as though he's been cast as such]. (Perhaps this is why you aren't receptive to cold approaches?)

 

 

 

It just seems that people are quick in attaching the wrong cause to an observed effect ("confounding"). Yes, there are rude guys, I get it. But this doesn't mean that every awkward or failed attempt stems from a rude guy - guys screw up too! The inverse ("successful attempt means the guy is good") and contrapositive ("good guy will have a successful attempt") are both logically false, and manifest as players and inexperienced guys respectively, and I figure these two categories far outnumber the actual rude and socially-unkempt [while not logically, colloquially the former may fall into this category i.e. players are "rude and socially-unkempt"].

 

To I'mNotYourBabe: I'm not telling you to continue with this guy, as you've already rejected him. But keep this in mind for the future.

[candykisses]

Hehe. Then are you speaking as a good guy for the good guys out there who may foul up their first impression? ;p

 

Yup I agree with you that there’s always an element of the unknown w/a stranger. Behaviour assessment in these types of situations may or may not be accurate, I get that, and you’re right. This is precisely why in a cold pickup situation, I watch how the guy acts and just go with my instincts, observation, and common sense, because unlike an acquaintance, I don’t have a lot to go off. The burden is on the guy doing the cold approach to indicate, through behaviour and conversation, that he is normal and worthy of a chance. I think it suffices to say that most girls who are experienced with men, and people in general, aren’t poor judges of character, unless she lacks the street smarts. The ones girls are usually wary of are the ones who seem piggish or who seem to pick up tons of other girls in the same manner. Safety first, right?

 

(Funny story: A guy once hit on me and then I ran into him a second time. He hit on me again but didn’t recognize me ‘cause I had changed my hair colour drastically that time. So, he thought I was a different girl. But using the same techniques basically. LOL

 

So it’s not that I am unreceptive to cold approaches per se, it would depend on the person doing it. But when it happens often, one does have to be rather selective. I’ve had a guy who otherwise seemed normal and genuine sit suuper close to me, like his body literally touching mine during conversation. He was a good-looking guy but that turned me off immediately. (Like, yo YO..…we just met, ya know?) hehe.

To date, I’ve only met up, subsequently, w/two guys who approached me in a public place. They were normal during approach so I took a plunge, both turned out to be cool, nice, well-mannered guys and I would never have known if I were unreceptive to all cold approaches as you say.