Out of the frying pan…

I know I’m playing with fire in posting something like this again, but what would life be without risk? :P (Apologies in advance for the, um, liberal use of disclaimers.)

Earlier today I came across a 100 Hour Board question on flirting (thanks to Meg for the heads-up), and of course my interest was piqued. I love reading and talking about flirting and dating and all of that (in case it wasn’t already embarrassingly obvious from the inordinate amount of posts on the matter in the last six months).

Anyway, one of the answers on The Board linked to the SIRC Guide to Flirting, which is a bit on the secular side, but there are plenty of gems strewn about. Like this, which cracked me up: “According to some evolutionary psychologists, flirting may even be the foundation of civilisation as we know it.” That’s right, folks. Pure bedrock. :)

Warning: some of the non-verbal flirting techniques outlined in this section are very powerful signals, and should be used with caution. Women should be particularly careful when using signals of interest and attraction. Men already tend to mistake friendliness for flirting.

I couldn’t help but smile — this is that true. It’s insanely difficult to tell the difference between friendliness and flirting. Which isn’t to say that people shouldn’t be friendly. I like being friendly. And I try to make it clear when I’m flirting and when I’m not, but sometimes it’s hard.

But for the meat of this post, we’ll head back to that post on The Board, this time skipping down to krebscout’s response:

How does one flirt? Searching for “flirt” at Wikihow.com will give you all sorts of answers, but I have the feeling you’ve heard all of those before, so I’ll let you in on my personal secret weapon, of which most females are afraid -

Make the first move.

Some girls are ridiculously stubborn about this, and I can’t understand why. The only two relationships I’ve been in began with my initiative. Give him your number, email him, sit by him, play tetherball with him; small or great, any effort will catch his attention. The most attractive secular quality is humor, but the second most attractive quality is another’s interest in you, wouldn’t you agree?

And from the SIRC Guide:

Although this simple fact has been demonstrated in countless studies and experiments, you don’t really need scientists to prove it. You already know that when you are told someone fancies you, or hear that someone has praised or admired you, your interest in that person automatically increases — even if it is someone you have never met!

Now, I don’t think I’m lazy, and I’m certainly not trying to get girls to do my job for me, but let me just say that this does make a difference. A huge difference. In fact, it’s gotten to the point that just the other day I decided in a moment of exasperation that I will not — cannot — ask girls out unless they show at least a modicum of interest. (Not that I know what a modicum is. But that’s okay, because Google is my friend. ;) And now I know. Isn’t the Internet wonderful?)

Before I get roasted (which will still happen anyway, though, no matter how much backtracking I do ;)), let me clarify. Sometimes I go on dates just for fun. Those aren’t the dates I’m talking about here. Other times, however, I am interested in a girl (and writing this strangely makes it feel like a crime, though common sense is thankfully telling me that’s ludicrous nonsense). That’s the kind of date under the microscope right now.

No, I’m not saying that I have to be sure a girl is madly in love with me before I’ll ask her out. (And though a recent comment on here may have made it sound like I think I’m God’s gift to women and that all available girls are smitten by the very sight of me, let me assure you emphatically that that’s not the case. :) I’ve been rejected enough times to be forever immune from that folly.)

All I mean is that for me to pursue a girl, I have to get some kind of reciprocation. I don’t have the heart to go after a girl who isn’t giving clear signs of interest (and yes, I know that makes me sound like a wimp and not the steel-willed knight that girls seem to crave, but I don’t think it’s as bad as it looks) (and by clear I mean male-intelligible). It’s respect for autonomy, I think — I’m not a big fan of pushy salesmen, and I’d have to be dang smitten with a girl to follow her to the ends of the earth if she’s not reciprocating.

Ah, reciprocation. Sometimes the girl doesn’t return flirtations because she simply isn’t interested. That’s fair enough. But sometimes (or so my female friends advise me), girls play coy and hard to get. This is supposed to make them far more desirable to us men. It’s balderdash. Or at least it is for me. Which brings me to the last quote, this one from Kassidy on another Board post:

And you don’t have to play the social games either. You just have to find someone that doesn’t like to play them either. Then you can despise them together. That’s what my husband and I did.

I’m sick of games. My heart is tired of cloaking the truth behind mists of ambiguity and double meanings. All I want is honesty — just straightforwardness, that’s all. Is that too much to ask? (By honesty I don’t mean professing undying love at a first encounter, or any such nonsense. But all of this guesswork about who’s interested in who is pure madness.) True, being open about your feelings can be more painful in the short run, but in the long run, straight talking runs pure and clear, not muddied at all.

I wish this were a world where I could just walk up to a girl I find attractive and say, “I find you attractive.” She’d say, “I’m interested” or “I don’t know if I’m interested,” and if she wasn’t interested, she’d say so and I’d go on my way. Overly simplistic, yes, but goodness, it would save a lot of stress and anxiety. (And to those who think this would kill the romance, in my opinion the romance doesn’t really begin until you know you’re both interested in each other. I don’t think anything of real importance would be lost this way. Perhaps I’m wrong, I don’t know.)

But this is wishful thinking. Or at least it is until I get so fed up with the system that I rebel and say to blazes with the game, I’m going to do things my way. And then, because of the inexorable nature of the game, I’ll be single for a very long time. Decades later, there’s a sliver of a chance I’ll miraculously find a girl who doesn’t play the game either. And who I’m interested in. And who is interested in me. And if that doesn’t happen, well, there’s a reason I just joined the “Probable Future Ministering Angels” group on Facebook. ;)

If this all seems to bitter, by the way, remember that melodrama runs in my veins. It makes for more interesting reading. :P

And now to busy myself preparing for the flaming arrows — I mean comments — that are already en route to my castle.

Like I said about the melodrama… ~sigh~

:P

Yes…some friends and I were recently discussing how much more pleasant dating would be if people had flashing signs on their foreheads giving the status of their feelings toward you as you were talking to them:”not interested,” “dating someone,” “engaged” (for the guys lacking rings), “PLEASE ask for my number RIGHT NOW,” etc. If only…however, Ben, I’m way serious about the window directory thing. Try to talk your ward into testing it. ;)

My new theory about dating is based on chemistry. Not that kind of chemistry; real chemical chemistry. It revolves around “activation energy”–the initial energy you have to put out to have a reaction. You say you won’t ask out a girl who doesn’t show some reciprocal interest. Why is this? The risk of being rejected/nothing happening is too great otherwise. However, the problem is that girls feel the same way: many girls don’t want to flirt unless they are sure the guy is interested. The way girls find that out? If a guy asks them on a date.

See the dilemma? No one is willing to move because the risk of wasted energy is too great. How is this problem overcome? Well, we must brace ourselves and simply be willing to lose some energy. This usually happens when we find someone so great that the risk of losing them is worse than the risk of getting rejected. Or when we realize that losing energy doesn’t matter. We learn that a relationship that doesn’t end in marriage is not actually a waste and so learn to get into relationships even when they aren’t a sure thing.

So maybe this is actually a theory of gambling or economics, but the same principles apply. You’re taking dating way too seriously if you can’t ask a girl out just because you like her, regardless of her return feelings.

And as for this line:

By honesty I don’t mean professing undying love at a first encounter, or any such nonsense.

Isn’t that what you usually do after two dates? Again, taking things way too seriously. :D

You know, I really wish that analysis of parts of life would make it any easier in application. It makes it easier to compartmentalize our thoughts and such, but then we start dealing with actual people and that’s where we run into problems. Because all of us really are a complete mess of contradictions.

Fortunately, and unfortunately too no relationship will ever be the same. In how it starts or works out or ends. It depends on the people involved. For your sake, Ben, I hope you find someone as in love with books as you are, or you may have nothing to talk about :P. But you might. You never know.

Basically, I think it goes back to life being about a certain degree of risk taking. You have to jump into the cold water every once in a while and risk falling flat on your face. That’s just part of the deal.

Ideally though, I do agree with you. Honesty is rather nice. If signals didn’t get crossed so darn often, it would help, but relationships of any kind require a bit of adjustment and compromise, so even honesty about certain things at the wrong time can cause problems…the person in me who wants to make this all much simpler than people make it out to be says that there’s only a game if you make rules for one. There aren’t any rules for dating exactly. There are certain conventions that are nice to abide by but, and I quote Pirates of the Caribbean here - the rules are more like guidelines anyway.

Take another deep breath, Ben :P. Doesn’t have to be this hard. Romance novels that we both love spoil us because we know the end of the relationship from the beginning. Anne of Green Gables for instance - we know the *second* Gilbert calls her carrots that they’re destined for each other because that’s how books work (and because we’ve read the books a hundred times before). But it wasn’t that easy for them - she spent a lot of time ignoring him and shutting him down and it *wasn’t * in the hard-to-get kind of way. She genuinely wasn’t interested. Not that every romance will work out that way - I had a guy chasing me for years ala. Gilbert and he got married to someone else today (yesterday?). That’s just…ok. I’ve talked for too long. The point is - you don’t know the end of a romance from the beginning of it, so be prepared to wade through a lot of junk/rejection/happiness/elation/whatever else that is sometimes included in the package.

Phew. Another soap box. Blast. Sorry, Ben ;)

Hope your Christmas was fabulous.

Most girls don’t like “playing the game” either. It takes a little while to build up genuine interest in another person, after the initial “I wonder what this person is like…I’m sort of interested…I don’t know him…he seems pretty cool” stage, but once that stage is passed, most people don’t like to torment and taunt and act coy. And if they do, they’re not for you.

In my own experience, and from what I’ve observed with my own friends, the main reason people are slow to get involved in relationships, or are reluctant to do so, is not because they’re trying to play with the other person’s heart, but because they’re afraid of getting hurt. It takes a long time for some people to work through that fear. It took me months to agree to “officially date” my now-husband because of the numerous terrible relationships I had before I met him. I wasn’t playing around, but I just couldn’t handle the possibility of being in another relationships, since by that point in time I saw all relationships as being abusive.

I don’t really know where this comment is going…but I suppose I would say that if you’re really interested in a girl, be honest about it, but not pushy or demanding that she immediately reciprocate. If she feels that there is potential, she’ll keep going with it, and maybe things will work out. Don’t date people who definitely aren’t interested, but don’t immediately assign a refusal to commit when you are ready for commitment to coyness and cruelty.

In other words: I agree with you. Openness and honesty are always best, and much more refreshing than an Austen-esque prolonged game of arched eyebrows and fallen handkerchiefs. :)

This is why people should have tails, like dogs.

The Kitten: I completely agree. I just don’t see the necessity or purpose of all the guesswork. As for the window directory, I’ll work on that. :)

Liz: Good point. As usual, I concede. :) (It’s funny how quickly I forget what I wrote not four weeks ago. ~sigh~) I think that point — only asking girls out who show interest — was more a fit of exasperation than anything else. But the later bit about playing games still holds. :) And hold on a sec, I don’t profess undying love after two dates. In my younger, more foolish days I might have done something similar, but in the interim I’ve become a man. Maturity is my middle name. Right. Anyway, I’ve learned my lesson: I profess undying love before I even meet the girl. :P

Joni: Don’t let reality mess up my beautiful theories! No data, please! Just kidding. :) I, too, hope that I find someone who loves books the way I do. Part of me is convinced that there’s no way I could ever marry someone who doesn’t. But I keep learning over and over again that none of my theories or opinions concerning dating are sacrosanct, and these houses of cards I keep building are perennially washed away with the tide. Oh, wait, those are sandcastles. Well, either way, I do a lot of rebuilding these days, so I’m more than ready to be wrong. :) Anyway, I like the rules being more like guidelines bit. And yes, I’m pretty sure my model for romances is mostly influenced by stories like Anne, with a few satellite ideas gleaned from observing real-life relationships. Sometimes it’s hard to tell what’s real and what’s just idealized dreams. It’s okay to soapbox when you’re right, Joni. :) And Christmas was fabulous. Hope yours was the same.

Anna: Good points, all of them. You’re right that fear is the main reason, and I’d somehow completely overlooked that in this post. (You’d think that after writing about it I’d learn from what I wrote. ;)) Since I can’t do much about the fear in others, all I can really do is just overcome the fear in myself and buck up and ask out the girls I’m interested in. Besides, like Liz and Joni say, it’s not that serious, really. It feels like rejection would be the end of the world, but it’s not. Life goes on. I also really like the idea of being honest (bold but not overbearing) about my feelings. It’s okay if a girl doesn’t know if she’s interested yet, or if she wants time to find out, or whatever. I guess I just don’t want to waste my time if a girl isn’t interested at all. But then again, if she isn’t interested at all, she’ll probably say no when I ask her out. So the solution is to ask them out. QED. We’ll keep the Austen-esque games safe inside the novels, where they belong. :)

M: Haha, you’re right. Isn’t there some tailbone thingie that the evolutionists tell us used to be one? If they’re also right about flirting being the foundation of civilization (er, civilisation, since they’re British), then it looks like civilization may be disintegrating.

Ben-
I’m sick of games.
I’m interested. Let’s get married.
Hmmm, that comes off as a little….creepy. Just saying…
Amy

I just want to say, Ben, that Amy’s comment is fabulous, and you totally asked for it.

Also, a friend of mine has a “Do you like me–yes or no?” application on his Facebook. I’ve always though it was utterly juvenile, but I guess I can see its potential for usefulness. You might think of trying it out. (I’m kidding.)

I agree that games are dreadful. I’m convinced that if I don’t end up marrying someone who has first become my best friend (the whole “friendship ripening into love” bit), I never will get married.

Oh dear.

What I meant by not playing games was, well, taking things one step at a time, for example. No need to rush into things. First things first, no? :P

I’ve seen that app, Katherine, and while it’s doomed to failure from the get-go, the concept does have merit. In a different world… Friendship ripening into love doesn’t seem a bad way to go. Sometimes I wonder if it’s the only way to go for overanalyzing, marriage-hungry folks like me. (I’m not saying that you’re either, of course. Just wanted to make sure that was clear.)

I think Stephan Pastis must be reading my blog. :P

Chances are you will find someone with interests that mirror yours to some degree, Ben. I mean, really - I’m not really interested in spending time with people who don’t interest me and don’t find me interesting, right? So chances are even if I don’t find someone who reads as much as I do, I will find someone who appreciates that part of me and is willing to discuss such things with me, do you know what I mean?

Maybe dating kind of is like a mission (I’m going to hate myself for saying this) - the only way to make any contacts at all is to open your mouth and shut it at the right times.

I agree. Girls with interests similar to mine are ten times more attractive than the others. And you’re right — even if the intensity or obsession isn’t there, as long as they understand and appreciate your interests, that’s enough. (And I do plan to understand and appreciate my wife’s interests, particularly the ones that don’t really interest me. Golden rule, of course.)

I don’t think opening my mouth has been the problem. :P Oh, wait, you included that important little bit about shutting it, too. Yeah, that makes a difference. ;) (As for the mission part, I agree. But nobody pounce on me for that post — it was two and a half years ago, and a lot has changed since then. I promise. :))

Ben,

Your melodrama is what keeps me reading. As for the actual topic of the post, it has been well dealt with here and I already spent over a decade analyzing it–I have said far more than enough!

That being said, I think that by and large your ideas and the comments already posted here are sensible and in excellent taste. There are many wonderful ladies out there who share these sentiments.

I suspected that the melodrama might have that effect — sort of like soap operas. :P Thanks, though, for the vote of confidence. I appreciate it. :)

When my kids get into the “drama,” we jokingly call it being “Jello dramatic,” because they often quiver and shake like Jello. Really, all their drama is about getting attention, being center stage, getting all the focus. Really, sometimes I read the posts here and think, he has too much time on his hands. Other times, I wonder why you write about some topics, knowing it will bring controversy. Ah, but controversy drives up comments and blog views, therefore rankings.

“Probable Future Ministering Angels” might be a interesting title for an LDS dating scene novel, in good ole Screwtape Letter/ The Great Divorce–C.S. Lewis style. Ben– this may seem funny to youth, especially those not yet married, or just newly wed. For those of us who have raised families and watched beautiful, talented, prepared peers remain single, this kind of joking is very poor taste. Actually, I celebrated my 30th wedding anniversary on the 29th and I was kind of saddened by the tongue and cheek light minded approach. There is a world of difference between light heartedly laughing at ourselves and our own foibles and taking sacred things too lightly. I feel matrimony especially in the eternal scheme of things, is very sacred. We come here to earth to become as God is, a King, and for women, His counterpart, a queen. . . In fact Holy Matrimony is Sacred (set apart for Holy purposes) motherhood. Yes, matrimony is literally motherhood. We can only become exalted as a couple. When we joke about our eternal destiny are we not mocking that? I can promise you, if any of you end up missing the mark, for any reason, you will find it no laughing matter.

Fortunately for the righteous, prepared woman, who never has a viable opportunity here on earth, God will make it right. God does place a greater responsibility upon his priesthood holders. Now Ben, 24 is not over the hill, you are not yet a menace to society.

Some of the games people play are:

– “flirt and tease,” really no deep interest in getting to know someone on a deep enough level to decide if there is compatibility, but just for the rush that you can get someone’s attention. This is really careless of someone else’s feelings. I have watched as young men have joked about getting married, an left the girl never knowing when or whether they should trust what a guy is saying.

– “pity dates” where, in some way, we think we are doing the other person a favor, but then again our lack of investment in looking beyond the outward appearance gets in the way of anything meaningful. Feeling like a charity case is so damaging to ones personal concept.

– dating “escape clause” girls, or guys, if the person doing it is a girl. So what is an escape clause? An escape clause is going out with someone “safe” that there is something about them that deep down in side you could not live with, but you go out anyway. Then when they decide to get serious you can then point out why it could never work. In other words, you have an instant escape clause. I do not think it is a planned act. Often when I talk to youth and they are doing the escape clause, they usually rationalize why that issue does not matter. However, as soon as commitment begins to take the stage, the escape clause rears its head.

– I have also observed that though guys say they do not like forward or silly girls, yet, these are the very girls they date until they are deeply ready for commitment. I watch as guys often avoid dating the very girls that have the traits they claim they are looking for. Why? When a girl is prepared, beautiful, intelligent, and has spiritual depth, the guys sees commitment all over her. Of course that is because they are ready and the guy is not. For the guy it becomes, “water water everywhere but not a drop to drink.”

More another time. I am sure you have not exhausted this subject.

Well, remember that nobody’s making you read this blog. :) And while it may look otherwise, the drama on here really isn’t about getting attention and all that — the drama happens regardless of whether I blog about it or not. The reason I blog about both the drama and possibly controversial topics is primarily because there’s a good chance someone else feels the same way, and it’s nice to know that you’re not alone (for both me and them). I don’t ever write posts just to get comments or views or boost my rankings, even if I joke about it. I write the blog I want to read — that’s all.

As for the joking, I am sorry if it appears to be poor taste and lightminded to you, but it doesn’t seem that way to me at all. Yes, marriage is sacred. I believe that with all my heart. But I don’t think that saying “probable future ministering angels” in any way demeans marriage. At any rate I don’t feel the Spirit leave, for what that’s worth. (And yes, I can tell when it does, in case you’re wondering. :)) There is humor in heaven. Even humor about marriage.

I said, “Actually, I celebrated my 30th wedding anniversary on the 29th and I was kind of saddened by the tongue and cheek light minded approach.”

The approach I was referring to was not my marriage being light minded, because it is not. I was talking about “here’s a reason I just joined the “Probable Future Ministering Angels” group on Facebook. ;)”

It is not that what you post about is so controversial, so much as it seems to be your preoccupation. I take you to be a bright and honest person. Yet, some times it appears that you say one thing and do another. No matter. My responses were forthright and sincere.

I expect good hearted humor in the eternities. We can be light hearted without being light minded.

“Well, remember that nobody’s making you read this blog. :) ”

Flippant (as in pert), but true. Thanks for the revelation.

and… it is rather, much ado about nothing. Benedick, I mean Ben, May you find your “Beatrice,” and live happily ever after;)

Meanwhile, I have much to do and you are right, no one forces me to be here.

Sorry if it seems that way. You can e-mail me privately if you have any bones you want to pick. :) As for the controversial topics, again, I blog about what interests me, and inevitably there are going to be posts that stir up heated discussions. It’s a law of nature, or at least statistics. But I can assure you (even if you don’t believe me :)) that I don’t go seeking out topics like that, thinking, “I need something that’ll generate lots of comments.” All I do, really, is blog about what interests me. If I wanted to be like the National Enquirer, believe me, I could do a heck of a lot better job at writing inflammatory posts. :P

[…] I was wrong. All along I’ve thought that being open/honest and not playing games were the same thing. But they’re not, I’ve found. (And yes, I know, this’ll be painfully obvious for most people. Bear with me. ;)) […]