I sometimes wonder how many of these cases -- and god knows there are lots -- are old goats and how many are old fools.
Was he making a real move on her, or was it an ill-advised attempt at a kiss-on-the-cheek greeting? Creepy either way, but rather more so in the former case than in the latter.
Wait, which line was you and which line was the undergrad?
1: Is there a meaningful difference?
4: Oh, sure there is.
What's the institutional reaction to something like this? Not, without more details, that I think it should be anything in particular, but does the 'Don't sexually harass the students' committee snap into action and assemble a file leading to dismissal, or is moderate pursuit of undergraduates still winked at? Or, to put it another way, is he significantly in trouble if she mentions this to someone in administration?
1: I was wondering just this.
4: Yes.
5: Oh stop. The student needs a recommendation. Also, it wasn't quid pro quo at all, there's no direct institutionally recognized grading/supervisory relationship-- which means that teh sexx0r would be within the institution's policies-- and it's not a pattern of behavior.
You answered 1, 4, and 5, but not 3. I wanna know whether senior professors are trying to sex up our Labs!
Dude, not saying he should be fired, asking. One hears a certain amount of 'It'd be as much as my job is worth to look a millisecond too long at an attractive undergrad' from academics these days, and I was wondering how that played out for real.
8: It's way exaggerated. One doesn't want to be gossiped about, but the actual risk of losing one's job is pretty slim. Not if you're an adjunct, and if you're untenured and have a rep that could be a problem, but actual instances of people losing their jobs over this stuff are pretty low.
8: I think a lot of claims about overzealous HR departments are overstated. It's pretty hard to fire someone with tenure and it's hard to fire GOod Old X, our colleague for lo these many years. For one-time, ambiguous situations like this it would be talking-to in most cases.
Here, though, I *am* curious about how it would play out if the student made a big deal of it. As I said, the faculty member isn't teaching her and isn't advising her formally, so I'm not sure what the force of the complaint would be.
Yeah, that's the thing, isn't it? In a sense, this isn't a problem: the student is basically an adult, she's surely dealt with unwanted passes before and will again, the guy doesn't have a habit of doing it or any power over her, she can just tell him to piss off.
I think the problem is less an academic one than a larger feminist one buried in that "she's surely dealt with unwanted passes before and will again." The only thing that makes academia special in this regard is that there's a constant supply of young people being taught that even those who should know better will act like assholes around girls.
11: would the feminist argument be that women should never have to deal with unwanted passes? That seems like a fairly high bar for men to clear? I'll go ahead and assume that the point is that guys shouldn't act like assholes around girls.
And I'm still wondering about 2. I had a law school professor who was uncomfortably touchy, but in a reasonably social way -- hand on the shoulder, social kiss on the cheek when meeting in non-class related circumstances -- but didn't convey 'making a pass', more just a slightly skeezy impression that he was putting on a really warm, affectionate persona because he got off on touching his female students. But this was clearly nothing that was a big deal or that anyone bothered complaining about formally, just mildly distasteful. Making a pass is wildly different.
I agree with 12. "acting like an asshole" =/= "making an unwanted pass".
11, 12: Huh. In the workplace, I'm mostly all about 'people make passes, they're all adults, you say yes or no and if it stops there life goes on.' And I suppose I'd say the same thing about a Chemistry prof hitting on a History major. But the 'favorite professor'/'mentor' thing annoys me, even if it's not a tight enough academic connection to be prohibited by school rules. But maybe I'm just being prissy.
Oh, I think it's kind of gross, and I think the guy was acting like kind of an ass. Just curious about the larger implications of B's statement.
But if I were a much older professor who was interested in not acting like an asshole, I would think to myself, "Hm, I'd better require fairly strong signals from a much younger person who is a student and to whom I am a mentor before making a pass." That wouldn't elimiate every awkward encounter, but it would certainly cut down on them. Seriously, the way my father tells it from his brief time in academia, nubile young things who wanted to hook up with professors weren't exactly shy about it, so there's minimal need to fear a missed opportunity.
15: Well this is where the goat/fool question comes in: is this something Prof X regularly chances his arm at with undergrads who he knows reasonably well, or has he transformed into a great moon-cow over some kid who has no idea that every little thing she says or does is being accumulated into a body of evidence in support of the idea that she has fallen for him.
"Hm, I'd better require fairly strong signals from a much younger person who is a student and to whom I am a mentor before making a pass."
See moon-cow issue above. You'd be amazed what some people can interpret as a "strong signal."
transformed into a great moon-cow
This is wonderful.
19: how about `We should hook up when you aren't my professor any more.' Does that count?
15/12: No, the feminist point is that we tend to excuse/allow men to make passes in situations where they ought not--e.g., "favorite professor/mentor"--and men tend to excuse/allow themselves to do so. After all, "you never know," and that Male Sex Drive trumps everything. The solution would be for guys to learn, as women have, how to hide or control that impulse when it's inappropriate.
And I say this as someone who has Behaved Badly in much the same way, which I ought not have done. On the other hand, I think women behaving badly is not (at this point in history) a problem in the way men behaving badly, because it's simply far less common and therefore easier for young men to treat as flattering/"just an unwanted pass" rather than a central fact of their role in the world.
But I'm interested in how a well-meaning sort of person might prevent himself from acting like an asshole, not discerning the motives of already-existing assholes. It's true that in some cases, even a well-meaning person will be all wishful about every little word/gesture/action on the part of love-object. But many, many of us can control this impulse almost all the time, and I would argue that bringing the entitlement/moon-cowness thing to full consciousness among many professors would stop much of the behavior, if only because their desire not to be known as creepy old men (and hence ridiculous and pathetic) will probably trump their desire for nubile flesh.
17 is correct. 18 still makes me want to know what the meaningful distinction is. I'm thinking from the pov of the student here, by the way, because I think her experience of the thing is the one that matters.
The solution would be for the guys who do this to learn, as the women who have learned this have, how to hide or control that impulse when it's inappropriate.
Fair enough.
All this talk about making a pass ignores the fact that even in a world of equals, making a pass at someone by flat-out going in for the kiss, out of the blue, is shitty and kind of creepy.
For passes to be non-objectionable, they should not be ones that get all up in someone's personal space.
26: there's that. Actually my first thought reading this post was "why is it that creepy old dudes are so totally unable to be suave about it?"
Oh, this is much worse than your average unwanted sexual advance, I think. If a male prof./advisor/mentor type did this to me (even in the absence of a possibility of quid pro quo) I'd be horrified, because it makes you wonder whether the whole intellectual/professional connection was in fact based on his hope that he could score with a younger woman.
teh sexx0r would be within the institution's policies
Faculty Handbook, Labs U, Chapter 1. When teh sexx0r is okay.
Yeah I know you're only thinking of the student's pov, but I don't think you can properly characterize the interaction without taking into account what both people think is happening. This is not to say, btw, that one motivation rather than another can absolve one of blame for making an unwanted pass/harassing someone/etc.
In a post titled "Speaking of Coetzee", it seems only fair (to the author, not the Professor) to consider both points of view.
The ones that are suave don't come off as creepy in the same way. It's not as if (as Frowner alludes to) there aren't professor/student relationships in which the students participate enthusiastically, and I'd say that professors in such relationships are sometimes, maybe usually, but not always doing something wrong. But the ones that just look creepy are the non-suave ones.
29: Bingo. And it's the sort of thing that leads one to keep potential mentors at arms length in future, which is so good for one's professional development generally.
26 is a good point.
I think 29 is good too. There is a fundamental difference I think between some faculty member hitting on unrelated students (no professional relationship whatsoever) and the same thing happening when there has been (or will be) such a relationship. It runs a real risk of undermining professionalism.
Why is it not stone-cold clear that macking on the students is tacky, and you shouldn't do the tacky thing, even if you won't get fired for it?
34: that's the thing, though, they are creepy! I would even say this schlump is rendered somewhat more harmless (not blameless, obviously) by his clumsy ineptitude.
Slol, my institution was founded by Gob Bluth. "You're all tapped out? Check your P&T requirements, assistant profs-- you're teaching at Fuck College!"
Why is it not stone-cold clear that macking on the students is tacky, and you shouldn't do the tacky thing, even if you won't get fired for it?
Because there is no end to the middle-aged Professorial capacity for self-deception.
As a woman who's experienced a lot of inappropriate passes, I still got naughty with a then-former, adult student. I was the one who worried about the reprocussions for him and called it off, though.
29 exactly. And that's why I think the student's point of view is the one that matters here--because in the world where young women learn that they are Sexual Objects no matter what context they're operating in, men with authority in arenas that are explicitly supposed to be about something other than sex have responsibilities to not do that sort of thing. Especially if they are *teachers*.
37: I agree, slol, but what a WASP thing to say. Are those Hickey Freeman jeans you're wearing?
37 gets it right. It was a terrible mistake during a bad time for me.
38: Weeell, I don't know. Part of 'suave' is being sensitive enough not to make a pass that's going to shock or repulse the recipient. A more 'suave' approach might have been genuinely less creepy, in that he wouldn't have made the pass because he would have figured out it was going to be unwelcome. (The problem of successful macking on willing undergraduates is a different and more complex one. Still tacky, at the least.)
37: Basically right. I suppose there are grey areas involving ex students, and involving say (typically) junior faculty and graduate students in other departments, etc.
I've been hit on by students a few times and while it's always been a bit awkward to deal with, I've somehow never found myself thinking `hmmm, maybe this would be ok'.
I agree, slol, but what a WASP thing to say. Are those Hickey Freeman jeans you're wearing?
L. L. Bean. Hey, I come by it honestly.
it's not a pattern of behavior.
How would you know? (Or more to the point, how does the student know?)
47: I think they have a 12-step for that now.
Slol comes out as a supporter of both the war and LNS.
It seems to me that a lot of our conversations about academia come down to when you can fire someone, as if that's the only way to motivate people. I suspect even with academics there are other factors at work.
Can I add fuel to the fire by noting that the student is older than the prototypical undergraduate, has been at parties with this faculty member, and has smoked
marihuana
with him?
Unrelated: Thomas Fehlmann gets it done.
Why is it not stone-cold clear that macking on the students is tacky, and you shouldn't do the tacky thing, even if you won't get fired for it?
Because there is no end to the middle-aged Professorial capacity for self-deception.
True, but I still think that this has a lot to do with gender. We're generally agreed as a culture that old women macking on younger men is tacky. Whereas old men macking on young women we tend to condemn clumsily, casting about for ways to explain it as predatory or threatening.
51: aw, c'mon, don't pick on slol. This site's about as WASPy as can be. Even ogged is kind of a WASP, in some ways.
54: still totally gross. On the other hand, an undergrad approximately junior faculty age-appropriate hitting on other undergrads? Perfectly okay.
It's okay, Tweety. Labs is just getting some of his own back from me and is entitled to more than a few cheap shots in this department.
We're generally agreed as a culture that old women macking on younger men is tacky.
We have? Nobody told me.
Agree with slol in #37 and and our Yemeni friend in #59.
Seriously, y'all, Substantially Older hitting on Younger is almost always a bad idea. I cannot get over how many men well into middle age remain convinced that they are all deathlessly attractive (for themselves alone, no less) to women in their early twenties. When I consider how much virtually-constant guilt and shame I felt while having a crush on someone in their twenties while myself having reached the advanced age of 32! And how my disengagement from that crush was mostly about the terrible fear of accidentally making myself ridiculous or embarassing Crush Object with my elderly attentions!
My student was older than I was, but it was still wrong.
54: See? If only we had better inhibitions about being tacky, these things wouldn't matter.
Now that we've solved the immediate problem of the post, I would dearly welcome a discussion of how to understand/retain/reinforce an aversion to bad-tackiness (macking on students, say) without embracing full-on pinch-assed WASPishness.
Because I admit that I have been tacky on occasion, and would like to stop, but no way am I going to start buying clothes from LL Bean.
57: I know you're kidding, but I'd really kind of agree. I think an awful lot of the discomfort with relationships across age differences is really discomfort about status differences, and age gets much much less important when the people involved know each other in a context in which they're formally equal.
B's a special adviser to Team Cougar on the The Bachelor.
54 isn't meant to de-gross the situation, and I agree it's gross; just (I think) part of an explanation (not justification!) for why Professor McOld thought he might be doing the right thing.
Labs' little blockquote flourish was a nice touch.
64: I'm glad you "know" I'm kidding.
B's a special adviser to Team Cougar on the The Bachelor.
So nice.
I cannot get over how many men well into middle age remain convinced that they are all deathlessly attractive (for themselves alone, no less) to women in their early twenties.
People work hard to ignore the fact they are aging, and have an image of themselves that gets increasingly out of date -- especially if they are single.
When I said you were kidding, I didn't mean to imply that you weren't actually hitting on your classmates.
Ooh, 64 is good. That helps with my 63 problem.
Also, shut up, Labs.
57 nails it. a 10 or 20 year difference between tenured professors getting together, say, really isn't the same thing as if one was a prof. and one was a student. There are other reasons you might question the wisdom of too large an age gap, but the most immediate concerns seem to be about imbalance of power.
69: but then they buy a red ferrari convertible an it's all good again.
True fact: wife #1 was hit on by her undergrad "mentor" while she was doing her Masters at a different Univ. Her loving husband was serving overseas in a war zone, so Prof. Creepy thought she needed some special attention.
Is it the fact that we get older every year, but the freshmen are always 18? Sic transit and all that.
Now that we've solved the immediate problem of the post, I would dearly welcome a discussion of how to understand/retain/reinforce an aversion to bad-tackiness (macking on students, say) without embracing full-on pinch-assed WASPishness.
Occasional readings of The Lecturer's Tale as a reminder not to turn into Victoria Victorinix or Morton Weissman, as appropriate?
Oh good, another deeply earnest discussion about norms.
70: ok, good. Seriously, my social world is such that I'm not really around that many people my own age (except you geezers: thanks, pretend internet friends!). On the other hand, normal-college-age kids are, like, totally kids. It's not an easy problem to solve. "Unemployed thirty-something undergrad seeks intelligent, professional woman for keggers and discount matinees" does not a compelling personal ad make.
I know, I shouldn't carp. Be the thread you wish to see in the word, and all that. I'm banninated.
75: Ooo, there's a whole bunch of extra tacky points on that one.
69: But not people, men. Our culture is constantly at work on women to remind us that once we're older than, what, 25 or so then the bloom is irretrievably off the rose. I've considered myself (in addition to too fat and too plain) too old for attractiveness since I was out of college, and particularly since I hit my late twenties. There would be no way that I--or, I think, most women--would fail to consider our age when hitting on someone. If anything, as you may gather, I think women often over-consider their age.
76: Damn, I think I meant Penelope O., not Victoria.
I know, I shouldn't carp.
Heebie hates that sort of thing.
78: Age-appropriate grad students in different departments? Showing up at the right departmental events to meet people might be complicated, but there might be a reasonable way.
78: You should totally run that add.
For what it's worth, I went to undergrad quite late also (and single). My solution was to take honors in two disciplines, pretty much negating the need for any social life. I hope you find a better one. Seriously though, I did end up meeting some grad students, you should try this.
I" cannot get over how many men well into middle age remain convinced that they are all deathlessly attractive (for themselves alone, no less) to women in their early twenties."
I think the problem is books. I've recently read 2 acclaimed contemporary literary novels in which the young female protagonist has a passionate love affair with her best friend's dad. In both the age difference has to be at least 30 years and the young woman is portrayed as desperately in love with the older man. And both novels were written by women.
My solution has been to hang out at one of the two places on campus where they serve alcohol, which tends to weed out the youngest, at least. Most grad students here spend 18 hours a day in the lab, which means they're somewhat hard to find, let alone get to know.
81: That makes sense. Ironically, for just those reasons, in our culture if the older woman is hitting on the younger man it is often seen as attractive (although not necessarily appropriate), because it means she is confident and hasn't fallen victim to the unnecessary insecurities that you talk about.
Meanwhile when a man does it it is almost always seen as being out of arrogance or obliviousness.
87: There are grad students in departments other than lab sciences.
78: Oh come on. Date the transfer students or something--they may be more or less the same age as the "traditional" undergrads but they're surely much more your peers.
81: Frowner's right. Obviously I make passes at younger guys, but I'm self-conscious about it to the point where my self-consciousness becomes a thing--I think I'm totally over-compensating. What I want is a decent damn rule of thumb so that I can be a happy cougar, indifferent to sexist nonsense about sell-by dates, without crossing the tacky line. Cats don't like being tacky.
What I want is a decent damn rule of thumb so that I can be a happy cougar, indifferent to sexist nonsense about sell-by dates,
OK, the rule is, "Don't do it at work."
90: No one in your professional field who isn't formally your peer, and if someone outside it is a lot poorer than you are, keep the socializing on a level that he can afford to pick up half of. Other than that, go crazy. Rowr.
91:
Does "behind the dumpster" still count as "at work"?
88: It's not ironic. It's because men don't deal with being hit on or ogled in every aspect of their lives every damn day, so being hit on by an older woman isn't just *one more situation where they have to fend off someone who doesn't have a decent sense of boundaries,* and they're free to respond to the individual, being flattered or revolted depending.
90.1 has figured out my general strategy.
89: not that many of them here. But yes, I know a lot of them, since they tend to hang out at the same place I do (near the beer taps, natch).
Does "behind the dumpster" still count as "at work"?
I dunno, are you a garbage man?
91: Agree with that, too. Aren't these all sort of basic understandings we have? Or is the problem that they are basic understandings, but that they're guidelines developed by prudes? (Genuine question. I fall into the prude category.)
97: I think 'absolutely nothing at work' is unnecessarily prudish, particularly given the amount of time most people spend at work these days.
98: Another suggestion -- make sure he is at least 18.
87: There are grad students in departments other than lab sciences.
Yeah, in the library.
I think by the time professor was smoking pot with undergraduate, we're already way into the territory of creepy. And not in the prof's class, not being supervised by the prof, doesn't make for not-having-a-prof/student relationship. If as was stated, the student is looking for a recc from the prof, then they have a professor/student relationship and it needs to be left at that and that alone. Just NO macking. or maybe I should change my name to crankyoldmarriedlesbian. otoh, I get cheek-kissed all the time in greeting, esp. in non-U.S. contexts, and never thought a thing of it-- kind of surprised people here seem to think otherwise.
80. The level of tacky goes up even further when one is informed that Prof. Creepy is married to a prof in a related discipline, and wife #1 thought of Prof. Mrs. Creepy as a confidant.
otoh, I get cheek-kissed all the time in greeting, esp. in non-U.S. contexts, and never thought a thing of it-- kind of surprised people here seem to think otherwise.
I've never seen anyone do that. I would be surprised if it was coming from someone who was not European.
104: There is a pretty strong north america/ europe divide on that one. Notwithstanding certain pathetic socialites in (eastern particularly) US, afaics.
Can WASPiness be rescued from LNS and the present administration?
What? The present administration is a bunch of rough-hewn Texans! If you tried to invite George W. Bush to Kennebunkport like certain other presidents I could name, he'd punch you in the face.
No. We hereby forbid the further breeding of golden retrievers.
105: I'm in a social group that's half-and-half cheek-kissy for greetings, some people do and some don't. Mostly, I'd rather not, which means that I'm always feeling standoffish when someone else leans in for the (perfectly ordinary) cheek kiss. Not socialites, particularly, but New Yorkers.
109: boy, you'd have a hell of a time around my huggy California friends.
Oh, I don't mind it, and if everyone does it doesn't bother me. But enough people I know don't cheek-kiss that I generally don't lean in first, and then I feel as if I'm being all cold and standoffish. This has been another visit to LB's neuroses.
99: What about "if s/he's really, really hot"?
109: I've never lived in NY, maybe it's more general there. I've only run into it coming from americans using it as a class tell.
I'm not a New Yorker, but it is true I hang around a lot of Europeans. And New Yorkers--but none who are or fancy themselves socialites.
what's the reference to golden retrievers? damn. I clearly missed something.
101
87: There are grad students in departments other than lab sciences.
Yeah, in the library.
I have been successfully chatted up in the library.
I did my BA and MA at a teacher-student-sex-friendly campus. When I first found out one of my friends (19) was blowing a prof, which is why she couldn't take his classes, I thought it was pretty creepy. And when a prof came onto me when I was 19, that, also was creepy. But when I was an MA student, flirty "I'd so do you" talk between profs and students was extremely common.
But now I'm at a school where the grad students don't even flirt with each other, lest a breath of impropriety waft through the halls. Lots of drugs, yes, but no flirting, between anyone, ever. The students are generally a lot safer in this environment, and you can concentrate more easily on work, but what has been lost?
Going all the way back up to 6 -- "The student needs a recommendation. Also, it wasn't quid pro quo at all." I have real trouble with these sentences. She needs a recommendation. Maybe there was no *explicit* quid pro quo. But somehow methinks that when you sit down to lunch with Prof. Mc Creepy to request a recommendation and he attempts to kiss you, there's at least an ambiguous/implied quid pro quo in there. Not saying evidence sufficient to convict, but the quid pro quo is sort of implicit in the imbalance of power.
awb-- really, what has been lost?? I'm all for sex, but geez, it doesn't have to be w/one of the grad students or profs in your own dept.
Also, I wonder how lesbians, or for that matter, anyone who just doesn't feel like talking that way, in your former dept (if there were any) felt about the "I'd so do you" talk. I know if it'd been me, it would have felt pretty damn awkward-- just another way to feel an outsider.
apologies awb. clearly, I need a nap.
And most of the flirting at Previous School was queer, actually.
I often say it's a relief not to be concerned about that kind of stuff at My School, and it is. It's just odd, when one is hard up for sex, to look around at a sea of attractive, mostly bisexual, brilliant, thoughtful people--my peers, not profs--and think, "I can't fuck any of these people without creating a scandal."
Di, this is not what happened at all, from how I understand the story:
But somehow methinks that when you sit down to lunch with Prof. Mc Creepy to request a recommendation and he attempts to kiss you
The rec wasn't a subject of conversation at all; it's just a fact that the student would, eventually, like a letter from McX. To take action, the institution would have to demonstrate what I think isn't even true, namely, that McX was tying the contents of the rec and the sex together in some way. My point in 6 is that the student is in a really bad position to press any kind of claim here, because the good will she needs can't be demanded.
123: I'm all for the idea that grad students shouldn't be discouraged in having a lot of sex. Amongst themselves, or with outsiders, at least. Not with undergraduates or professors. And preferably not in the halls.
This isn't meant as a guilt trip at all, I'm just nosy -- why'd she tell you? Was it pure "OMG, this was so gross", or was there an overtone of "Prof. Labs, can you somehow make Prof X. recognize the error of his ways?"
Were there other overtones? Did she dim the lights when she told you?
I've been made clumsy passes at by a prof who I needed recs from. It was awkward, but we got along well enough that we could later get a beer and laugh about it. "Dude, you are the most ridiculous flirt," etc. If she can maintain the friendship without leaving the event unspoken, it might even help her rec. But it's a crap position to be in if your friendship can't bear the pass or if it feels like pressure.
FL: yeah, but the fact that she's in a really bad position b/c she needs the rec is something any prof who isn't entirely brain dead can figure out, and ought to be expected to figure out, and furthermore, is that feature of their relationship which makes theirs definitively a prof/student relationship irrespective of anything else. which is why, as you said, ick.
125-- ever been in the position of trying to deal with mess resulting from bad-breakup amongst one's graduate students? I have. repeatedly. And have seen female students, in particular, lose incredibly valuable time to degree trying to cope with the fall-out. I don't think there should be rules, but whenever one of my grad students asks, I advise looking outside dept for sex and/or romance.
130: the actual case is not so clear, because the applications are in the future, it's unclear if this prof knows about grad school plans, and she certainly hasn't asked for the letter yet.
I'm not sure of my exact wording earlier on the thread, and I'm too lazy to check, but when I say "not in a prof-student relationship" I mean "in the sense relevant to the institution's policies, which prohibit romantic relationships between faculty and *students they are currently grading/assessing*." There are ick-relevant facts, and HR-relevant facts, and in this case they come apart.
120: I'm always fairly uncomfortable with the whole "Oh, colleague, I'd do you" kind of talk. It's fun and flattering if you're hearing that a lot and everyone wants to get into your personal pants because you're just so cute and brilliant and everything, but since I've never been in that fortunate position I'd rather be able to pretend, at work, that my fuckability isn't of major concern to my colleagues. That's, to me, another problem with the "oh, can't I sleep with one of my hott, nubile students?"...it's a reminder to your not-hott/less nubile students that they will never be able instantly to catch a professor's attention because of their adorability. When I watched my cuter classmates get lots of attention in a classroom setting from professors, I felt like shit, honestly.
125: sure, I should have emphasized more the *outsiders* (outside the department, outside the school) part. This is a variation of the age-old `don't date people you work with', and your advice is sound if not always followed, I'm sure. And the more time intensive your work/school life is, the harder it is to date outside your group.
My point was more that AWB seems to be describing an environment that is pretty repressive about this sort of thing, and I think in that case the cure may be worse than the disease.
As a sophomore, I was hit on by our College Democrats adviser--not a professor, but a 30-something alum--in a manner so unsuave that even I, one of the unsuavist of my generation, could see just how unsuave it was. One night, on the way back from a meeting which had deteriorated into a discussion of Tolkien, he invited me to his place to see his first editions. And, well, if it got too late, I could just spend the night, he said. I was a bit flattered, actually, but, yeah, right. This man went on to have a minor political career, but I imagine him now saying to some guy "You know, you look a lot like Harry Potter."
That's not that bad -- being obvious is a good thing, so you can turn down the pass before you're in his house at midnight.
When I watched my cuter classmates get lots of attention in a classroom setting from professors, I felt like shit, honestly
I believe this, it makes all kinds of sense, and I'm sure it happens all the time, but I never noticed it. Probably too obtuse.
AWB has written before about the erotic in the student-teacher relationship, and I know this must be very common, but I have never felt it, nor observed it. I've never been a teacher, and then I'm sure I would.
134- I just don't know that the cure is worse than the disease in this kind of case. My own grad dpt transformed, while I was there, from a everyone-fucks-everyone to a 'we don't do that' and the latter was better; much less melodrama, less weidness for the few like myself who just weren't inclined to say "i'd so do you" to any man in the dept (or woman, but there were very few of those). Newbies would come in and bemoan what they thought a prudish norm, but they weren't there when there was no norm against fucking people in the dept. Now I hear things have gone back to the way they were when I arrived, and all the old melodrama and weirdness has returned with it (something I've heard more than once from students trying to transfer)
That's, to me, another problem with the "oh, can't I sleep with one of my hott, nubile students?"...it's a reminder to your not-hott/less nubile students that they will never be able instantly to catch a professor's attention because of their adorability.
Yep. As I think Clive James remarks somewhere, student/professor relationships are generally unfair to the screwed and unscrewed alike.
When I watched my cuter classmates get lots of attention in a classroom setting from professors, I felt like shit, honestly.
I tend to be pretty neutral about this sort of stuff I think, but do remember having a bit of cognitive dissonance about it once. We tend to have fairly low percentages of women in our classes; not as bad as some disciplines, but not nearly balanced. Because of this, I try to be careful about classroom environment (thinking about the students behaviour, not just mine) and discourage anything that might be discouraging to women in the class. I had one class where the best student also happened to be quite a beautiful girl. So I had to wonder what the impression others in the class would have. She was well prepared and asked questions (which is sometimes like pulling teeth) so I would interact with her in class as much as anyone, at least. I realized I didn't know if another student in the class would pick up on the fact she was on top of the material, or would assume something else. I started to de-emphasize her role in classroom interactions a bit, but I don't know that this was the right thing to do, either.
Not that you did anything wrong, but that's depressing.
136. Yeah. Credit where it's due. I think I said something like "Well, I'd love to see them, but I should get back to my dorm."
133: Hmm. I'm not so sure it's "fun and flattering if you're hearing that a lot and everyone wants to get into your personal pants because you're just so cute and brilliant and everything." It's actually alot more flattering (in a professional and/or academic setting, anyway) when people want to get into your actual work product* because you're just so brilliant and everything. When they have a hard time getting past your pants, it's rather annoying.
* Sentences like these make being a lawyer annoying -- I really wanted to say "get into your briefs," but that wasn't capturing the point so good...
137: I dunno, I'm uneasy with very literal talk of the erotic content of teaching (In the abstract, of course, it's a commonplace). Professors wouldn't be so thrilled, seriously, if students they didn't find cute were hanging on their every word, obsessively attending office hours, and doing their best to generate erotic tension, so what it all seems to boil down to, to me, is "sexy students should be able to flirt with sexy professors regardless of any other consequences for the class as a whole; those who are left out should just deal, and if you're not Teh Sexy too bad for you."
140: I think, seriously, that the smartest talkiest students (like Frowner, at least at St. Mediocre where I took my degree) often need to be discouraged from dominating the class. It's rather like the matter of nubility: students who are smart but unconfident, students who want to practice argumentation, students who have opinions that are worthwhile even if they aren't the Best Ever...those students can get really demoralized by the constant yak yak yak of various Cleverboots-types. It was really hard for me to learn to be quiet in class, but I think it was probably the most important thing I learned.
145- also, if you are 'teh sexy' or might be, but would rather profs & peers engage with you about your work then you're a prude, or 'one of those', and at any rate, not worth engaging with at all. That, irl, is what I've seen happen in sexualized depts where people talk regularly of wanting to 'do one another'.
That, irl, is what I've seen happen in sexualized depts where people talk regularly of wanting to 'do one another'.
I know of a case where a woman giving a presentation to such a Dept (not her own, not her discipline) had her audience of academics break down in hysterics when she began a talk with the words "My work straddles two areas." She was genuinely nonplussed, and then appalled. Junior High with Tenure.
146: But as an instructor, you do lean on those people when the alternative is for class sessions to be endless rounds of "okay, anybody?" You can revert somewhat to pure-lecture technique, but that's annoying when you're explicitly supposed to be leading a post-lecture breakout session. Middle ground is hard.
I've been in classes where it felt like it was really just the prof and two or three students having a conversation, and the rest of the class were spectators. It would probably be better if everyone were involved, but I don't think that was on offer.
gonerill-- exactly. And as though there isn't enough already that makes this 'junior high with tenure'.
In my department there are at least five grad-student-on-grad-student couples, all of whom met in the department. The concept of a grad student with a professor sounds totally ridiculous, though. (and not just because every single professor is married) These are the sciences.
I've been in classes where it felt like it was really just the prof and two or three students having a conversation, and the rest of the class were spectators. It would probably be better if everyone were involved, but I don't think that was on offer.
In that situation the (possibly temporary) creation of a "raise your hand to be called on" rule may work wonders. Then the professor can consciously call on people who aren't the Talkative Brilliant Talkers Who Are Fanboys Of The Professor And She Of Them.
Saying that grad students in the sciences ought not date each other seems like it would lead to a heck of a lot of childless scientists. These people don't get out much.
Also, the concept of "eros" between the student and professor is laughable in any science class. Or math or statistics or economics. But not judo.
149: Well, in my own case (blushes) I was quietly told by the professor to stop talking so much. (With, actually, the result that there were a lot lot lot of silences, which made me feel a little better. In fact, I'm not sure that the horrible shaming of the private-talk-with-Frowner-the-freshman was actually a good idea.)
But I think a little bit of meta-conversation class discussion might help...that way, the chatty kids wouldn't feel targeted, and at least a few of the less-chatty would probably be motivated. Not that then every single person would talk, but it would probably help a bit. And I think it would help a lot in the long term, as people had a chance to reflect.
S/b "meta conversation about class discussion".
Law school was lousy that way -- most of the classes consisted of three or four people allowed by the professor to pontificate at will, and thirty or forty who might get to talk if they left their hands up for long enough. I was generally in the small group, but it still seemed wildly unfair.
What I want is a decent damn rule of thumb so that I can be a happy cougar, indifferent to sexist nonsense about sell-by dates, without crossing the tacky line.
The line is half your age, plus seven years.
Calling on people & allowing them to pass worked reasonably well. Though you could get a string of "pass" in a row, esp. if the class was generally hostile to the professor. In general even a flawed lecture-with-discussion worked better for me than pure lecture--even if I was fuming about some idiot from the Fed Society who dominated the discussion, I was still more engaged than I tend to be at a straight up lecture.
146: I agree. I think it is somewhat separable from what I was talking about. I've had classes where I've had to shut down a particular student or two from dominating the class. This situation was different, I thought.
154: You'd think so, wouldn't you? But it isn't true.
161 continued: ... but it clearly isn't a hotbed.
What I want is a decent damn rule of thumb so that I can be a happy cougar, indifferent to sexist nonsense about sell-by dates, without crossing the tacky line.
B, are you serious about this?
First of all, shed the "cougar" language. That already buys into the suggestion that there's something tacky about older-women/younger-men relationships.
I dunno (well, I do) what you and Frowner are on about here: if a woman and a man who happens to be younger are attracted to each other, things may follow.
Isn't it the same as any nascent relationship? Suggestions fall out of the woodwork. Except when you're talking about aggressively hitting on someone who otherwise hasn't given you any signals; which I guess is what you're talking about.
House style!
I dunno (well, I do) what you and Frowner are on about here: if a woman and a man who happens to be younger are attracted to each other, things may follow.
This suggests a degree of ease, self-confidence and transparency that almost never characterizes my relationships. I mean, whenever I get involved with someone there's a huge vast quantity of time and care involved in revealing that we are interested in each other, so that no one will be embarrassed if one person is but the other isn't. And--being me--there's also a great deal of second-guessing, of the "what if he thinks we're going out for a drink as friends" variety. And then there's the whole "well he/she seems interested, but what if this is just stupidity/wishful thinking on my part?"
Now, you might say that I should just be direct, but that isn't going to happen in this lifetime. So if someone is more than a couple of years younger than me I assume that there is no way they could possibly be interested, and indeed am myself ultra-punctilious about not-doing-anything-that-could-suggest-interest, because I don't want to Make A Scene.
Hence, the social utility of heavy drinking, without which no one would ever understand anyone else!
(No, wrong, bad. But it can clarify matters.)
165: well if nothing else, the heavy drinking can short circuit the whole huge vast quantity of time Frowner talks about in 164. Then people can get straight to the important business of the day: misery and rejection.
shed the "cougar" language. That already buys into the suggestion that there's something tacky about older-women/younger-men relationships.
Next you'll be telling me to change my username.
Except when you're talking about aggressively hitting on someone who otherwise hasn't given you any signals; which I guess is what you're talking about.
Absolutely. I'm unequivocally pro-sexual harassment, legally prosecutable or not. And as I've already made clear, I think that making a pass at someone who *has* given you signals is perfectly fine, even especially if that person is, say, an undergraduate in your class or your intern or your kid's best friend. Those flirtatiously seductive male Lolitas know *exactly* what they're doing.
Nearly 200 comments and no one has yet corrected Labs? It's "Speaking of Goatse", Gayatollah.
I should also say to 164, that the eerie similarities continue. I don't think I've ever gotten involved with anyone without a months-long period of ambiguous mutual longing on both sides. But I'm notoriously insane.
LB is my science-fiction twin! That's what I like about the internets....there may only be one other person with my exact neuroses in these United States, but by damn at least I know who it is!
Although I find that I kind of like longing. It's easier, though, to enjoy longing when you're in a steady but (formally though not in practice) non-monogamous relationship.
I'm unequivocally pro-sexual harassment
Heh. Heh?
Well, whatever. I understand what Frowner & LB are referring to, and when I was younger, I was more likely to go in for that long-term fear and longing. It can be delicious.
But I'm notoriously insane
<bookmarking comment for use in future disagreements with LB....>
I took the bus last weekend and let me tell you that sucked ass. Im am so driving/flying next time.
To 164 and 169:
Has either of you encountered those guys Megan once wrote about, who are attentive to women and manage to put them at ease, and who somehow manage to bypass a lot of the hesitations that build up on both sides? Directed at you?
I was shy and inhibited as a rule, but there were magic times, which gave me a sense of possibility, where things clicked really fast. Ever felt that?
Megan talks about those guys a lot, but I don't think I've ever met one of them.
They're not paying attention to you, Teo.
Don't worry, Teo. It can happen to you! Those guys will notice you eventually.
Just try not to come off as too smart. Dudes hate that.
I have decided that I hate the house style. It's slow to copy everything and make italics instead of typing a number.
I was shy and inhibited as a rule, but there were magic times, which gave me a sense of possibility, where things clicked really fast. Ever felt that?
You don't understand--first there's the "click" then there's the months of longing and wondering if you somehow could have imagined it. Really, truly slick men don't go for me nor I for them, though.
I have decided that I hate the house style.
An appropriately Unfoggedian sentiment.
I can only seem to hook up with dudes when we're both really really easy. If he makes a show of coyness at all, it's over; I'm not going to go around harassing innocent dudes who want to emerge with their sweet chastity intact. Therefore, longing has never, not once, led to sex in my very limited and idiosyncratic experience.
unfogged doesn't need a house style.
i'm not sure it could handle a house band.
I can't imagine how 181 coexists with "I only hook up with dudes who apologize for their inadequate manhoods".
dudes who want to emerge with their sweet chastity intact
Who are these dudes? AWB are you sure you don't live in, like, Victorian England?
I'm inclined to be jealous—I've even resented JM's roomate, a loathsome creature, for his success—but Megan's description was very positive, and "slick" is not how I would characterize it.
And I've been "on," and know what it feels like; there's "click" and then there's "click-click-click."
183, 184: I think the link here is that the only dudes I end up sleeping with these days are wilting lilies. AWB: Wilts Lilies.
Presumably those aren't "Wilt's Lillies?"
I don't want to evoke unpleasant memories, but "no-spark" was not so described here. Don't disappoint us!
189: No-spark did not apologize for his equipment, but, although he was comfortable around me, he was extremely reserved, often coy, and fairly submissive. I may have fucked that situation up by not being dommy enough, in retrospect.
Has either of you encountered those guys Megan once wrote about, who are attentive to women and manage to put them at ease, and who somehow manage to bypass a lot of the hesitations that build up on both sides? Directed at you?
To me you are describing a type of ladies' man (manifestly distinct from a womanizer). Someone with a very high degree of interpersonal intelligence, who uses that ease and fluency to build rapport without being creepy or pushy.
It's almost like having perfect pitch, where "perfect" means "in this time and place, with this person" and "pitch" means "conversational rhythm and body language."*
It's a really remarkable and somewhat rare skill, but yes, I've definitely seen it.
*Yes, yes, double entendres up the wazoo there.
I guess when I've encountered that, it hasn't looked like me-directed skill so much as an inner calm and poise. He's being himself, which makes it easier to be myself. We're both being ourselves, and this highly facilitates getting it on.
When I've been in situations when someone is very me-directed, and I'm very him-directed (or her-directed), this feels a little hostile and higher-stakes, and it usually ends in denial from one side or the other.
good god no wonder the birth rate is through the floor.
What I want is a decent damn rule of thumb so that I can be a happy cougar, indifferent to sexist nonsense about sell-by dates,
"kick out the jams, motherfuckers" has served me well for the last five years as the comments policy of D^2 Digest and I recommend it as a policy for most other areas, apart from foreign wars.
in related news, the sexy are going to get more sex, and one does not have to be a die-hard evolutionary psychologist to think that there's not really very much that can be done about that.
the sexy are going to get more sex, and one does not have to be a die-hard evolutionary psychologist to think that there's not really very much that can be done about that.
I guess Blair really did kill the socialist ethic.
The Edge of Skeeventeen:
[slol stands by elevator, holding bouquet of flowers bought for Mrs. slol]
Secretary, wandering by: Someone's going to feel lucky tonight!
In high school days, my friend and I were standing in the lobby of my building when a thirty-something couple came in. A few minutes later, the man came back out. "Not tonight, eh?" said my friend. I've always admired him for that one. (Turned out the couple were married and the guy was just fetching something, but still.)
Turned out the couple were married
And he bothered to explain that before or after he smacked your friend upside the head?
I figured that out later; the guy just ignored us, the bastard.
[slol stands by elevator, holding bouquet of flowers bought for Mrs. slol]
Last time I saw a similar tableau, the man in question was asked: "What did you do wrong?"
Answer: You don't even want to know.
I didn't do anything wrong. This time.
196: I once interviewed a (male) witness at 10:30 pm in an Extended Stay Deluxe near the airport. Got quite a look from the clerk at the desk.
191: I've known guys who had that kind of demeanor, but they generally turned out to be really misogynistic and disdainful of women's interest in them. Puzzling, but there it is.
I've known guys who had that kind of demeanor, but they generally turned out to be really misogynistic and disdainful of women's interest in them. Puzzling, but there it is.
Right, to me those guys fit under the "womanizer" umbrella. Successful at the manipulation, if somewhat superficially, but with a undercurrent of hating women rather than genuinely liking them.*
*N.b. Personality description can be repeated as appropriate with different genders/sexual orientations.
I've met some of the type to which IDP refers who are not complete dickheads like my roommate. Even run off for a pleasurable night with a couple of them.
But But But
I may not be young any more, but I'm wiser, understand women much better, know what I want (and have realistic expectations), have more money, and power.
And these sweet young things these days will do things the gals would never do when I was young. It says so in all the magazines.
78: Tweety, have you seen Kicking and Screaming? The Eric Stoltze character Chet may be one on whom to model your future exploits.
You know you're macking a mockery of the house rules, Wrongshore.
I have not seen Kicking and Screaming, no, but it's hard for me to imagine ever modelling myself on Eric Stoltz. Buckaroo Banzai, yes. Humbert Humbert? I'd have to say maybe. Eric Stoltz? No way. Although his Pulp Fiction character was kind of endearing.
macking a mockery
Freud you delectable minx, you've done it again.
Dude, try the pdf23ds plugin. That shit leaves the house style in the dust.
I met a guy like IDP describes once. Met the first time, click. Ran into each other a second time, click, click, clickety click. Left the country the next day and my love life went straight to hell.
Moral of the story: Don't travel.
I guess when I've encountered that, it hasn't looked like me-directed skill so much as an inner calm and poise. He's being himself, which makes it easier to be myself. We're both being ourselves, and this highly facilitates getting it on.
This is so wrong. "Being yourself" can certainly be attractive, but the perfect pitch Witt's describing requires a great deal of conscious cultivation. And is no less charming for that. Probably it's more charming, even.
212: "being yourself" can involve working quite hard to create an image, after all.
Didn't somebody on this blog once say it was all about confidence?
Forget charming, try Eric Love, and I quote:
"You have to look at why sex was created," Eric Love, the director of the East Texas Abstinence Program, ... "Sex was designed to bond two people together."
To make the point, Mr. Love grabbed a tape dispenser and snapped off two fresh pieces. He slapped them to his filing cabinet and the floor; they trapped dirt, lint, a small metal bolt.
"Now when it comes time for them to get married, the marriage pulls apart so easily," he said, trying to unite the grimy strips. "Why? Because they gave the stickiness away."
Damn, I wish I could be that smooth.
214: So the point is that my divorce would have been less wrenching if I'd just given a little more of the stickiness away before getting married, right? Had I only known!
soubz in 166: 165: well if nothing else, the heavy drinking can short circuit the whole huge vast quantity of time Frowner talks about in 164. Then people can get straight to the important business of the day: misery and rejection.
This is so very true.
I am slowly clearing my head of my feelings for John--the bit about misery and rejection revived them--but the comments about dating peers and co-workers did remind me of one thing. He met his ex-girlfriend in his residency class, and although they both went into different specialties, I can't help but think that the break-up was made harder by the fact that they both work at the same hospital. Maybe they don't have to see each other, I don't know.
215: Yes, apparently so. Though I am unclear as to the quantity of "more".
My sister saved all her stickiness for a charming sociopath. Bad move, sister!
She makes her living counseling ex cons and druggies now, though, so she learned something. They send her the tough guys and she turns them to jelly.
I think I told you all about the graduate student who hit on me when I was a Freshman in college. It was seriously creepy. He wasn't teaching me, but he was teaching friends of mine, and he was probably in his early thirties. He was in the Government department and in my 6 person 4th semester Greek class, and we used to chat before class. He was really just taking the class for fun, he would say, though he would pretend that learnign Greek was work-related. There was some Plato in hsi dissertation.
He propositioned me by returning a piece of paper with a poem attached. He had composed Homeric-style verse praising my hair, and he invited me to his house for dinner. He wrote out his telephone number in Roman numerals.
I was seriously creeped out. I never responded directly, but I did avoid showing up to class early and never sat next to him.
It warms my heart to think that I'm some 22 year-old lifeguard's creepy-early-thirties guy story.
"being yourself" can involve working quite hard to create an image, after all.
True if yourself = psychotically insecure. Avoid at all costs.
"...he was all hairy, and he had this huge scar. I get the shivers just thinking about it."
He wrote out his telephone number in Roman numerals.
Unsuaviter in modo, dorkiter in re.
"...and he was there every single day. Dude, get a life!"
"He probably went there to hit on you guys. So gross."
"Totally."
"He probably lives with him mom."
"Heh. And I almost went out with him! I didn't know!"
"That's so scary."
"...he was all hairy, and he had this huge scar. I get the shivers just thinking about it."
or
"His name was Harry and he had this huge scar. I get shivers just thinking about it."
"They kept telling him to put his wand away. It was so embarrassing."
"...and he was there every single day. Dude, get a life!"
This dialog is obviously an extract from a fantasy of yours. A relative of the humiliated cuckold genre.
225: Like you rate that high. "There was this creepy older guy, and I thought he liked me, but he was so ineffectual about it. I think maybe he's gay. Is your uncle still single?"
"They kept telling him to put his wand away. It was so embarrassing."
"And then I said, 'It's leviOHsa, not leviosAH.' He never did get it, though."
215 is awesome. Probably the definitive response.
So the point is that my divorce would have been less wrenching if I'd just given a little more of the stickiness away before getting married, right? Had I only known!
Or, as Woody Allen says in his 60s standup about divorcing his wife in New York (when infidelity was the only valid grounds), "So the Bible says Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery, but New York State says you have to."
I thought the key paragraph from the article in 214 was this:
Mr. Rector says viewing abstinence primarily through the lens of public health distracted the focus from marriage. "Once you understand that that's the principal issue," he said, "you understand that handing out condoms to a 17-year-old is utterly irrelevant."
NYT reporter editorializing aside, this is pretty remarkable. The focus is not on public health? Dude, I don't know about you, but public health -- broadly defined -- is the only reason I think government should be funding anybody to talk to teenagers about sex.
The most important aspect of public health is MORAL HEALTH, Witt.
"He probably lives with him mom."
"probably lives with him mom."
"with him mom"
"him mom"
"him mom"
(I should really have posted this in the House Style thread, but...)
I found sexual debut a comical expression.
210: (How did you do?) It was a tight game but I came in third. Email me for more.
The most important aspect of public health is MORAL HEALTH
Wait, I'm sorry, who are you? And more importantly, what have you done with the woman who posted the kick-butt political to-do list yesterday?
OT: moving sucks.
Carry on with the morality or whatever.
moving sucks
That's just because you saved too much stickiness for the current home. Just rip the tape off quickly.
(Yes, I'm mostly just commenting now because I learned how to do italics. Unfogged is so educational!)
BOLD AND ITALICS IS TOO MUCH IS JUST RIGHT
Oh dear, strikethrough! How do I do strikethrough?!
strike, /strike strikes through your message
I DEMAND THE ABILITY TO DEFINE FONT SIZE
My head is fuzzy spinning.
Can I simultaneously multi-format?
Hang it all, I deman d that we be able to use (font) tags to change the color of the text. That G in 254 was #FF1CAE!
Aw, c'mon!
block?!
I'm gonna be hungover by morning...
Color and size, I'm telling you. Also, while we're at it, typeface!
No, color and size would just be too much. Way too much.
255: That's a mind searingly bright color.
I ♥ different fonts.
Crap, I gotta figure out how to do that.
I wondered if there were a way to do that
fromthecookiejar
?
We can use <small> tags but not <font> tags? Zounds.
What about <big>, is that a tag?
<bigger>?
<bigger>?
This has become the blog equivalent of King of Hearts, with ogged in the Alan Bates role.
And finally...blockquote and pre simultaneously
And all the while he was hoping to be Alan Bates in The Go-Between.
269: Unf as the keeper of the asylum?
OGGED WILL RUE THE DAY
I suspect he's ruing away already, given the recent comments.
Asylum, Romper Room -- there's a fine line.
THANKS EVERYONE
THIS IS HOW I WILL NOW COMMENT
PLEASE EDIT 277 TO HAVE 4 <BIG> TAGS INSTEAD OF ONE
So what's house style for quoting 279?
278 completely cracked me up.
Of course I meant to say that
278 completely cracked me up
You have until comment 300 to play with. Knock yourselves out. Don't try to wander into any other threads, either.
Sorry dad, we'll be quiet.
If I were a bigger man, I wouldn't point out that I was totally right in 274 when I said:
OGGED WILL RUE THE DAY
I suspect he's ruing away already, given the recent comments.
Note correct House Style, minus the big thing, which, c'mon, had to try it once.
Woe is me that the blink tag is not supported.
I wanted to tell ogged, in Hebrew, that he was wedded to me according to the laws of Moses & Israel, but I don't think I can manage it before 300.
Don't try to wander into any other threads, either.
In other words, please make this entire site descend into total typographical mayhem. Probably too late to redact.
I am totally laughing REALLY LOUD right now.
And now that I don't have to babysit you lot, I'm going offline. Tell it to the wind!
Woe is me that the blink tag is not supported.
ITYM "marquee".
Aw, you're really no fun ogged. That was a work of beauty. Put it back!
You can simulate blink with marquee, after all, but not vice versa.
BTW, Cryptic, what is Cleveland's finest?
Just wait until everyone else shows up and wants to know what they missed. Ogged's gonna rue tomorrow, too.
Ogged: I'm going offline
Pssst! w-lfs-n! Come over here! I have an idea!
w-lfs-n's the original little bitch, he won't do it.
I move that the upcoming meetup be boycotted in support of our noble and tireless friend me, whose creative expression has been heavy-handedly and arbitrarily silenced..
I saw it. Damn, I wish that I'd done some sort of save click thing so that teh screen image would be saved for posterity.
313: Umm, you mentioned here something about it. Just curious, for the next time I'm in the 'burgh.
Oh, well, you can get it in many cities near Cleveland. I was referring to Great Lakes Brewery's Holy Moses White Ale. In the summer, that is. To be replaced in the winter with Great Lakes' Brewery's Edmund Fitzgerald Porter.
321: Thanks. I'll forward to local contacts and remember for my next visit. Much as I like pumping Iron, it would be nice to bring something else out to the country folk.
You can simulate blink with marquee, after all, but not vice versa.
If by "simulate", you mean "do something else entirely", then sure. In my world, though, blinking text and scrolling text are not the same thing.
If by "simulate", you mean "do something else entirely", then sure. In my world, though, blinking text and scrolling text are not the same thing.
I seen it done on Metafilter. Some guy tinkered with the parameters on <marquee> so that what was displayed was indistinguishable from blinking text.
I just put my face right up on the monitor and blink rapidly while staring at a word. It's great fun.
326: put my face right up on the monitor and blink rapidly
Made me think of this.
Oh, my head hurts. How many formatting tags did I try last night?
328: Oh, my head hurts. How many formatting tags did I try last night?
You don't want to know. But it was when the formatting tags came off that things got really wild. Naked comments, human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria.
was this whole thread just restating: its awkward to realize that people play vairious roles in life, but noone is really very good at seeing people only through the role they are trying to play at the moment?
[i]164: "I mean, whenever I get involved with someone there's a huge vast quantity of time and care involved in revealing that we are interested in each other"[/i]
THats just spreading the embarrasment out over such a long period its too small to notice during any one slice of time. Just rip the bandaid off.
196: "In high school days, my friend and I were standing in the lobby of my building when a thirty-something couple came in. A few minutes later, the man came back out. "Not tonight, eh?" said my friend. I've always admired him for that one. (Turned out the couple were married and the guy was just fetching something, but still.)"
This was the kind of thing you guys were saying makes me an asshole last week.
"being yourself" just means you're so practiced at being smooth you don't even have to think about it any more