Too rough for a sunburned ass?
That particular brand of condoms reminds me of a bad prom night (mine) about six years ago. Thanks for bringing it all back.
Oh and bytheby, i bought them at a 76 station, so, yeah.
Is this in the women's room? If women's rooms all sold "Rough Riders", and men's room all sold whatever kind has the tag "ribbed for her pleasure" (which is what I usually see), that would show that the world moved in a kind of celestial harmony.
What is the preferred condom?
Nobody prefers condoms.
Aren't freeway gas stations famous for anonymous gay hookups?
We're talking the unisex, opened with a key on the end of a big wooden block that you need to get from a cashier type of bathrooms.
And, yes, I've heard 6 but still...why?
Maybe condom makers put their more unusual condoms in those outlets (heh) where the purchaser is most likely in dire need of a condom, so that the purchaser (heh) unwittingly tries something he wouldn't otherwise have tried (heh).
Ok, I want to know if ribbed for her pleasure make a difference.
10 to 8. Or 9, I suppose. Come to think of it, apply 10 when and where you wish.
9. you really should stipulate what gender you would be using them with
I'm applying 10 to my... wait, is this a family blog?
I do see Rough Riders more than any other brand in convenience stores. But I only rarely see bathroom vending machines any more. They're behind the counter with the cigarettes.
why don't you buy us some, we'll try them out and report back?
for increasing her pleasure, sweedish penis pumps are really the only way to go.
15: Heh. At a previous job, I entered data for a NIH-funded study of the effectiveness and user acceptance of a "baggy" condom. Believe me when I say that it's really difficult to find the appropriate MedDRA code for an adverse event of "distracting squishy sound".
How are you supposed to put on the one in 15? That is to say, is the extra bit a wattle or a coxcomb?
20:
Now I understand why BG was requesting that music mix.
"The PP has a loose pouch of latex on its underside, right along your frenulum, (the neck, as any student of biology knows)."
Just a couple more, apo. I'm so close!
The word keeps getting funnier each time I read it.
I got these by mistake instead of the ones without "Twister" in the name.
They don't look as odd as the one in the picture. In fact, I thought the only difference was that there are ridges around the sides (probably shaped like ellipses).
Anyway, I don't think she noticed anyway. There's one data point.
I thought the frenulum was the little piece of flesh between your gums and your lips.
There are several frenula. Much like the rectum is not the only sphincter.
My guess is that wacky condom add-ons would make a bigger impression during anal sex. But there's not much actual data behind my hypothesis.
the rectum is not the only sphincter
Just the best one.
Anyway, I personally have never bought a condom from a vending machine in a gas station bathroom. I would like to hear how many people have done so, and see how high is the percentage of those people who did so in order to participate in an impromptu gay hookup. It does seem plausible that that's what they're there for.
But there's not much actual data behind my hypothesis.
Your hypothesis actualizes my behind.
32. hey now, this is a family blog.
Now if you have a question concerning casual bangin' between strangers at truck stops and families, let's hear it.
Well, when I have sex with my family I eschew the Studs. But when strangers do it...not sure.
Much like the rectum is not the only sphincter.
Afrenulumsaywhat?
36: There's the pyloric sphincter, for one, heebie, the malfunction of which can result in projectile vomiting.
Like Spewy! If anyone gets that obscure-ass reference, I'll be mighty pleased.
I haven't come up with anything regarding the market penetration (yes I typed it) of Rough Riders vs. other brands in bathroom vending machines, but I did come up with information that Rough Rider is the preferred condom of choice in the Maldives as well as Guyana.
I've bought em from bathroom vending machines before just in case, but not for a gay hookup.
I would never buy a vending-machine condom because the saddest moments of my life have involved only having one condom, which can lead to various kinds of tragedy. Buy *at least* a three-pack, always, even if you're fairly sure there will be a single act of coitus.
That's so true. This one time I was trying to make a balloon doggy for a small child before he died of cancer...you can guess the rest.
You gave a small child cancer? Now _that's_ outside the swipple mainstream.
You can't give a child cancer if you use a condom, Walt.
41: After you wasted the condom on the balloon doggie, he said what he really wanted was to have sex before he died, and then you were unable to oblige?
S'okay, I let him go down on me.
(...embarrassed that I posted that...)
I've been told by a gay friend of mine who gets more ass than he knows what to do with that ribbed condoms are not at all good for a man's pleasure, if you will. We ended up turning the ribbed ones into balloons when they were handed out back in high school because the things were so useless.
the rectum is not the only sphincter
Just the best one.
Yeah. If you think anal is messy, just try pyloric.
46: (...embarrassed that I laughed at it, now that you're embarrassed...)
In the early 90s I worked at Carter-Wallace, the maker of trojan condoms. I started in the mailroom and ended up answering a lot of the complaint mail. We'd have to open the stuff wearing gloves because folks would return the defective merchandise to us after it had been used. People would also write to the company demanding that we pay to "fix" pregnancies that had resulted from a broken condom.
The internal documents I saw referred to the ribs on condoms as giving "perceived consumer benefit." I always liked that "perceived."
I actually hate ribbed for her pleasure. Maybe it depends on the woman, but it's like sandpaper. Not pleasant.
I got a box as a present though, when I started dating again after a long man drought otherwise known as "law school." Apparently, only girls give each other condoms as presents, or that is what I have been told by dudes.
And yeah, condoms are dispreferred. This is why monogamy rules.
One instance of single-blind testing indicates that "ribbed for her pleasure" doesn't even get noticed once you get down to business. Got some in as "extras" in a box of normal condoms once, popped one on without the girlfriend noticing, and afterwards asked "So, baby, notice anything, uh, special? Hmmm? More special than usual?". Only response was "What are you talking about, you twat?" Save them for the balloon animals. And the little boys with cancer.
Maybe it depends on the woman, but it's like sandpaper. Not pleasant.
The wrath of condom?
I haven't bought'n condoms in years. Whenever there is a gathering of more than like four gays, there's always someone from an NGO, handing out condoms and lube.
It's genuinely irritating when you're at a Tuesday 9 pm screening of 'Brokeback Mountain' and there's Lube Dude, giving you water-based, lambskin paraphernalia and lecturing you about hooking up.
I've never even noticed the brands here, to be honest, though European condom companies always have great ads. It's funny how condoms are advertised in this coy kind of way in the States, without explicit reference to what they're designed for. Like toilet paper.
without explicit reference to what they're designed for
X's condoms make better water bombs than any other big name brand! Be sure to buy X's condoms for all your party needs!
We sold Kimono Microthin condoms, a Japanese brand, at Whole Foods. People seemed to like them a lot, although it must be said that they were theh only brand we carried. They are said to be 20% thinner than other ultra thin condoms.
The Japanese seem to be expert condom makers. I have read that condoms are the preferred method of birth control in Japan, so they've devoted a lot of effort to designing them. I've read and been told that the Kimonos preserve the guy's sensation.
People seemed to like them a lot, although it must be said that they were the only brand we carried.
Any word on their durability, BG? My experience with ultra-thin condoms is that they are prone to breaking, with all the anguish that implies.
I bought those Kimono condoms once, and the guy I was sleeping with complained that they were too small and tight. He had an average-sized cock. I was a little embarassed about the whole thing.
If we're going all presidential about it, I shall divert the thread by admitting that I have never used a condom in my life, as period of my life when I might have been expected to was neatly bracketed between the beginning of the age of widespread oral contraception and the emergence of widespread HIV.
Any more of the older generation in that position?
If you got the whole country using those ribbed things, would you call yourselves a "condomnation?"
59: I'm of the same vintage but did use them, in a situation where I was the responsible party.
Kimono microthins are my preferred brand over the last, say, decade. I had a durability problem only once, for what little that anecdote is worth - not nearly enough of a sample to draw any conclusions. I've read, and it seems believable, that breakages are usually the result of not enough lube or the use of latex-incompatible products, and I think it's pretty easy to be knowledgeable enough to avoid those problems.
60: "Condominium" is a funny word.
I don't need to be presidential to say that I'm old enough to fit into Hanson's demographic, but am also familiar enough with intolerance of the side effects of oral contraceptives to have had the experience he hasn't.
58, 63: Kimonos are the condominimums.
One of the best parts about monogamy is not needing to use condoms. Man, they're just no fun at all.
I got a box as a present though, when I started dating again after a long man drought otherwise known as "law school." Apparently, only girls give each other condoms as presents, or that is what I have been told by dudes.
Why would condoms be a good gift?
Also, guys don't know each other's size, and wouldn't care to presume.
Kimonos do seem to be on the small side, but they
make a MAXX which isn't huge.
Crown condoms (also quite thin) seem to be really tight around the base. Durex Love and GV One aren't bad.
Also, guys don't know each other's size, and wouldn't care to presume.
You buy the largest you can possibly find, and include the receipt so that he can return them.
Threadjack:
During breaks at the studio, this youngish guy---we'll call him "J/sh"---has started coming up and talking to me. I'm friendly to the guy but not, you know, interested, and we've chatted for five or ten minutes here or there.
Yesterday, we were talking about lead contamination when, on our way back inside, he said, hey, we should go catch a beer over at [whatever the hell] sometime after work. And while I was trying to remember whether I'd told him that I was living with my boyfriend and thinking that I had, my mouth was saying, "uh, yeah, that'd be nice."
So he gets my email off me, and that very day sends a painfully terse, carefully composed-to-look-nonchalant email. I reply, still friendly, saying "sure, sounds like fun! Two caveats: I don't drink, and I have a wonderful boyfriend." He hasn't replied yet.
So, Mineshaft: did I do wrong?
You buy the largest you can possibly find, and include the receipt so that he can return them casually let it fall from his wallet as he pays the restaurant bill on his next date.
Nah. That is funny, though. You should have told him you refused to set foot in [whatever the hell] just for the sake of completeness.
JM,
yes, that is not the way to get on-the-side nookie.
I want BG on my side when we play sex-trivia pursuit!
I just feel sorry for him. He was doing everything right! (J/sh is clearly a bit of a nerd, and while he seems mostly to have escaped his black-trenchcoat phase, I doubt that talking to chicks comes naturally to him.)
It's very unfortunate, but sometimes when I'm really sure I'm not at all interested, I'll relax into a conversational mode that is easily misconstrued as flirting.
/whitehouse memoir style
did I do wrong
Yes. You not abstain from alcohol, because drinking it makes everything more enjoyable and helps you suppress feelings of despair and self-loathing.
Well, practice makes perfect, and anyhow you win some you lose some, is I'm sure what his friends on doubleyourdating.com are telling him.
insert "should". Blasted cut & paste errors.
Cavemen Knecht Say You Drink Alcohol, Make Better Happy!
In the mid 80s when I was living in Botswana some US NGO sent a bunch of condoms to the Gov't for AIDS prevention. Unfortunately a large fraction of the condoms were branded "Black Mamba" which in cultural context might as well have been "Penis Destroyer" - they ended up in the dump.
Definitely the not drinking is unforgivable.
I just feel sorry for him. He was doing everything right! (J/sh is clearly a bit of a nerd, and while he seems mostly to have escaped his black-trenchcoat phase, I doubt that talking to chicks comes naturally to him.)
I wish there were a way, and I'm not suggesting that there is, to level with him in the way you are here, to tell him that he's not been in the wrong and has nothing to be abashed about.
Black Mamba, Penis Destroyer would be a great radical feminist comic book superheroine.
You didn't do wrong. There is an unavoidable awkwardness in turning someone down, especially someone you feel inclined to reward for having the skirt to chat you up, but you have greater obligations to your honey than to him, so you let him down in a fairly innocuous way.
The alternative would have been to say, at the original question, "I can't, I have a boyfriend", which deprives him of the plausible deniability about whether he was inviting you on a date-date. You also could have let the boyfriend slip in conversation whilst at the bar, which is no less disappointing to the guy, and has overtones of "I might have kept the boyfriend secret if I were interested, but now I've decided I'm not interested so I'm deliberately letting it slip."
So I think you have minimized the injury to the guy's ego, and given him the consolation prize that you are interested in talking to him at a bar as friends, even though you don't drink.
I bought those Kimono condoms once, and the guy I was sleeping with complained that they were too small and tight. He had an average-sized cock. I was a little embarassed about the whole thing.
Ugh, same thing happened to me, only with a drunken hookup. We get to that point, I pull a Kimono condom out of the drawer, and after much fumbling, the guy sheepishly asks for another one. Same thing happens with condom #2. The guy says, look, this is very flattering and all, but do you have anything else?
Now, if you'd agreed to go, had him buy you a drink, and then given it to your boyfriend, who unbeknownst to him had been sitting next to you the whole time? That would be kind of mean.
Black Mamba, Penis Destroyer would be a great radical feminist comic book superheroine.
Wikipedia giveth, and Wikipedia taketh away! Comic book, yes. Radically feminist, not so much.
There is a probably apocryphal story about a psy-ops operation in the Pacific theater where the U.S. forces contrived to let the enemy discover "personal care kits" for the U.S. forces that contained ludicrously oversized condoms.
Yesterday, we were talking about lead contamination...
A choice seductive topic.
which is no less disappointing to the guy, and has overtones of "I might have kept the boyfriend secret if I were interested, but now I've decided I'm not interested so I'm deliberately letting it slip."
Not everyone would agree that this is less disappointing.
I do like, JM, that you specified that you have a "wonderful" boyfriend; if he thought your boyfriend were merely average, he might get his hopes up.
90: I heard that in joke form. In the spirit of entente, the USSR makes a large order of condoms with an American company, but they specify that they should all be ten inches long. The company is torn: profits or national honor? It eventually chooses to send the condoms, but marks each one "Medium."
I'll have you know, Tweetybird, that I put a lot of thought into that adjective.
89: Come on, Stras, she's a member of "B.A.D. Girls, Inc.", a group which also includes Asp, Diamondback, Impala of the Femizons, and Valerie Solanas.
96: also known as the Society for Cutting Up Mutants?
95: ... I put a lot of thought into that adjective.
Somewhere in the blogosphere:
...and that very day I received a painfully terse, carefully composed-to-look-nonchalant reply ""sure, sounds like fun! Two caveats: I don't drink, and I have a wonderful boyfriend."
So my imaginary Internet friends, is she hinting at a threesome?
96: also known as the Society for Cutting Up Mutants?
The Superfriends for Cutting Up Mutants.
So my imaginary Internet friends, is she hinting at a threesome?
Also, is the not drinking code for "bring heroin"?
100: Coke, Tweety. Threesomes are no fun on heroin.
So my imaginary Internet friends, is she hinting at a threesome?
She said "wonderful" not "feminist."
101: who does coke and doesn't drink? That's like eating apple pie without ice cream.
"I can't, I have a boyfriend", which deprives him of the plausible deniability about whether he was inviting you on a date-date
This is weak; there was no doubt in his mind and now he's rejected plus led-on just a little bit. So yes, you did wrong, but not a lot wrong.
JM, the only thing I might have done differently would be to leave a bit more plausible deniability abot the date-ness of the invite. I'm not quite sure, though, how you do that.
104: But he's NOT rejected; she's just not available. A genuine case of "it's not you, it's me."
Threesomes are no fun on heroin.
I hear it makes you last a long time, though.
Come on, you don't agree to go out and then mention your boyfriend.
104.---I did think that I had previously mentioned my boyfriend... still, I do have something of a guilty conscience about the whole thing, so perhaps you're right.
This is weak; there was no doubt in his mind and now he's rejected plus led-on just a little bit. So yes, you did wrong, but not a lot wrong.
Really, though, is getting abruptly shot down preferable to being "led on just a little bit"?
Being led on isn't the greatest thing in the world, but it beats unequivocal rejection in my book. It implies that the other person puts you in the category of people they could imagine having feelings for, or at the very least, that your unrequited love is nothing to be embarassed about.
Rejection can only be sugar-coated so much, and getting rejected for the specific reason that the other person is commited, with said rejection delivered in the context of quasi-flirtatious banter, is about gentle as it gets.
I do have something of a guilty conscience about the whole thing, so perhaps you're right
In any case, it's a minor sin.
And he was being so deniable about it! We were talking about heavy-metal contamination in the canal area, and then he asked me if I'd ever been to the "Canal yacht club," which is apparently a bar, and then there we were all of a sudden and I didn't want to be all presumptuous and mean.
He's probably at least five years younger than me, although I suspect he doesn't realise that.
the only thing I might have done differently would be to leave a bit more plausible deniability abot the date-ness of the invite. I'm not quite sure, though, how you do that.
The usual route is to find a way to casually mention one's partner in the reply. "Sounds like fun, my boyfriend also enjoys beer!" Only, you know, subtle.
This is weak; there was no doubt in his mind and now he's rejected plus led-on just a little bit. So yes, you did wrong, but not a lot wrong.
No, JM, you didn't do anything wrong. Ogged is insane. How is this even a little question? WTF are you supposed to do, assume that every guy who asks you to go out for a beer is trying to get in your pants, and that such is the sum total of his possible interest?
114: "I should ask my boyfriend if he's been there in one of his yachts!"
109, 110: Ignore ogged, he's quite wrong here. The guy initiated the whole thing, if he is so mfing sensitive that he can't take the later revelation of new information he should have researched that all up front. Good God.
How is this even a little question? WTF are you supposed to do, assume that every guy who asks you to go out for a beer is trying to get in your pants
Yes, obviously. Are you serious?
assume that every guy who asks you to go out for a beer is trying to get in your pants
Not to put too fine a point on it, but in the past that assumption has usually been safest. It gets a bit isolating.
118: Some of us do have friends of the opposite sex with whom we are not scheming to have sex.
I thought it was the Go/wanus Yacht Club, which is a much better name.
If the guy were classy, he would suggest you invite your boyfriend and still go.
I should submit that here.
if he is so mfing sensitive that he can't take the later revelation
What does this have to do with anything? What do you people think I'm arguing? Just that you shouldn't accept an invitation only to reveal later that you have a boyfriend. Reveal when you accept/reject or before. I don't see what there is to argue about.
He's probably at least five years younger than me, although I suspect he doesn't realise that.
Hey, nothing wrong with that.
Fleur usually doesn't wear her wedding band, and she is naturally gregarious and has a tendency to physicality (e.g. touching her interlocutor's arm). So she gets hit on a lot by people who assume that she is single and ready to mingle. Her stock response is to smile and say something like, "I'll have to check and see if it's OK with my husband."
121.---I was trying to maintain a thin veneer of anonymity. Hi J/sh!
still, I do have something of a guilty conscience about the whole thing
So hook him up with a slutty friend.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but in the past that assumption has usually been safest.
I guess it depends what you mean by "safest." You really don't have any male friends who just enjoy haning out, or male friendships that started out with him wanting to get into your pants?
yeesh, sorry, your quotation marks threw me & I tried to google proof.
I don't mind if someone deletes that, obv.
127: what kind of guy is so turned off by being told a woman has a boyfriend that he no longer wants to hang out with her? What's the harm, that is, in mentioning it?
I'm still focused on your description of his temperament, and wish you could do him the good of leveling with him. Nothing you've said here reflects badly on you or him.
128.---Don't worry about it, Katherine K-dawg.
JM, clearly you didn't do anything wrong here, and Ogged is just being his crotchety old Shia self, chastising you for sluttily chatting up strange men without your burqa.
Just that you shouldn't accept an invitation only to reveal later that you have a boyfriend
this i also don't get
why it is impossible just to be friends to have sometimes drinks together
here it's either dating or no contacts whatsoever
people sometimes offer me some help and i accept without much thought just to not be rude for example and afterwards have to find that i need to feel like obliged to them and should offer some kind of reward, strange
and i always had more male friends in my life, here it's practically impossible
K-dawg
So, Jackmormon, maybe you'd like to go out for drinks sometime?
130: None. She could have mentioned it. I'm arguing that it wasn't necessary. It just seems strange to require that she mention it in the absence of clarity about what the guy was really up to.
absence of clarity about what the guy was really up to
There doesn't seem to have been any absence of clarity, and there almost always isn't.
you shouldn't accept an invitation only to reveal later that you have a boyfriend
But going along with the 'hey, we should grab a beer sometime' invitation isn't formal enough to count as accepting an invitation. You'd really have to be on your guard and looking for a place to mention the boyfriend to drop it in smoothly there.
Let's face it, if the guy goes into a depressive spiral and offs himself, JM will be the one primarily to blame. Men are needy and fragile and should never be disappointed, rejected, or denied in any way.
what kind of guy is so turned off by being told a woman has a boyfriend that he no longer wants to hang out with her?
Indeed. Such a category exists, but it's surely worthwhile to smoke them out and make them leave, anyway.
From the dude's perspective, J-Mo's reply can have a whole range of possible meanings.
1. I have a boyfriend with whom I am deeply in love and will one day marry. I'm going out with you because I want to be friends or because I don't want to hurt your feelings. In any event, I don't want there to be any misunderstanding.
2. I have a boyfriend, but who knows how long that will last. It's prudent to put a few irons in the fire for the next time I'm available.
3. I have a boyfriend, and he's pretty wonderful, but I'm not ruling out that I could find someone even more wonderful, and maybe that someone is you.
4. I have a boyfriend, but hey, sometimes I do crazy things. Be forewarned that I set the bar pretty high, and I'm never going to be able to acknowledge it afterward.
There doesn't seem to have been any absence of clarity
But: And he was being so deniable about it!
So, you know, you're wrong.
Two caveats: I don't drink
A jackmormonish friend of mine worked at a bar one summer and advertised himself as "Sam, the Mormon bartender."
"Sam, the Mormon bartender."
Same principle as eunuch harem guards, I imagine.
And he was being so deniable about it!
So, you know, you're wrong.
That's not the same as an absence of clarity.
Tim and stras gets it right about ogged being wrong.
"Sam, the Mormon bartender."
Same principle as eunuch harem guards, I imagine.
I don't expect comity on this. Y'all are coarse and ill-mannered Americans, and I love you anyway.
Same principle as eunuch harem guards, I imagine.
All the better to lull the owners into a false sense of security.
On the clarity issue, I have to admit that I agree with ogged on this one. I knew he was hitting on me; I just wanted to behave like I didn't have to acknowledge it by batting him down. (But I really thought I'd dropped the fact of my honey into conversation earlier at some point! Maybe I got that guy mixed up with all the other guys I talk to outside on smoke breaks, who I know aren't really flirting with me.)
So, Mineshaft: did I do wrong?
No. It's awkward as hell, but it happens, especially to gregarious people who are used to hanging out with the opposite sex as friends. "Grab a beer sometime" fits into that casual space that is good for a first date but also ambiguous if not everyone's on the same page.
You brought up the boyfriend awkwardly, but before you went on the date, and there's no way not for it to be awkward, so you did right.
It doesn't have to be awkward, but the onus is mostly on the guy to react gracefully.
So, Mineshaft: did I do wrong?
No, it was OK. But best possible response: "I'd love to, but I already said I'd go for a drink that evening with [SINGLE FEMALE FRIEND] - is it OK if she comes along?"
Advantages:
a) ain't a man alive would mind having a drink with two women
b) emphasises that this isn't a date, just a social thing, but does so non-insultingly
c) given b, you can drop a mention of the bf's existence without it seeming clunky
d) best case, J/sh ends up with friend! All is good!
152: best of all, [SINGLE FEMALE FRIEND] gets roped into being set up with some random dude and can't back out of it!
Jackmormon, how can you be a jackmormon and not drink? I understand that the occasional six-pack of Schlitz is basically obligatory.
154: she makes up for it by downing a Big Gulp of coffee every morning.
assume that every guy who asks you to go out for a beer is trying to get in your pants
Not to put too fine a point on it, but in the past that assumption has usually been safest. It gets a bit isolating.
Relatedly, wearing the wedding band has made it much easier for me to make friends with women (or, before marriage, I saw the same effect as long as I was moving in social circles where everybody knew I was attached). My experience has certainly been that women are wary of acting friendly, in a platonic way, around single men. And they're not wrong...
Speaking as someone to whom no man ever seems to reveal that he has a girlfriend*, I think JM did absolutely the right thing. And if I received an email response that said, "Hey, you should know I have a wonderful girlfriend," I'd be flattered, because, hey! He thought I was cute enough that my invitation merited a qualification! It would be much worse, I think, to hang out and then, when he starts making his move, suddenly be all "OMG. I had no idea that you would imagine this was a date! I am in a relationship!" At least, the latter is what happens to me a lot and it sucks, making me think it really never would have occurred to him that I was datable.
* - This is not bragging; many of the guys who have refused to tell me they had girlfriends were guys who thought I was deeply unattractive. One such gentleman of my acquaintance who would never, ever date a woman over a size 2 (some weird neurotic thing) did not tell me for almost two years that he was engaged, though we saw each other every day. One of my friends describes this kind of behavior as a friend who simply cannot manage friendship without the ongoing promise of future sex that will never happen. Like, the instant you either make that explicit or explain that you don't want to have sex with them, the relationship ends. This is quite common, IME, and really confusing and hard to manage.
How do white people ever get laid, spending so much time parsing minor verbal exchanges? Yet they must, because there are little white people all over the place.
JM did fine. This is the standard kind of little bump that is routine in interacting with other people. If this guy is going to break out of the nerd-shell and flirt with women, he has to learn to take this kind of stuff completely in stride.
Now I can't ever buy a Kimono condom. If they don't fit, they're useless, if they do fit, I'll forever after be embarassed. I'll certainly never be able to date an Unfogged woman. (Of course, all the Unfogged women have wonderful boyfriends).
Hey-O! Just got a reply email:
"lem/onade is a perfectly appropriate drink for a nice su/mmer evening, and, i was thin/king friendly, but i ap/preciate you let/ting me know you have a bf, in case i had more on my mind. :)"
And then he goes on to propose Tuesday. So. Young J/sh appears to have taken the classy high road. However! He did so in a way that just a bit makes me feel like I was being freakishly and self-regardingly paranoid. Yeah, you had more on your mind, dude; I am hotter than ten thousand suns.
i was thin/king friendly
He is 100% lying.
Of course he had more than friendship in mind, but isn't it easier all around for him to claim he wasn't? You don't get to shoot him down *and* have him continue to flatter your hotness. That's having the cake and eating it too.
wasn't s/b didn't.
The boy is smooth, he played it nicely.
And then he goes on to propose Tuesday
...which would be quick work. Wedding Thursday, or will you wait until the weekend?
"lem/onade is a perfectly appropriate drink for a nice su/mmer evening, and, i was thin/king friendly, but i ap/preciate you let/ting me know you have a bf, in case i had more on my mind needed to sharpen my machete. :)"
The boy is smooth
The boy is smarmy, but I can see how you'd make this mistake.
He is 100% lying.
Just because you can't imagine enjoying a woman's company without enjoying the woman, it doesn't mean the same holds true for young Josh.
161 and 162 get it right.
I may be finding myself in JM's situation right now. I continue to refuse to believe it, because if it was in true it would be the only time in my life that I was aware of a woman who was more attracted to me than I was to her, and I don't want to presume that such a thing could happen, lest I develop an ego all of a sudden. But it might be true.
Silence, 167. 161 was based on the text of 160.
Man, it's a sorry old world when ogged is right, but in 166 he totally is.
166: that was the slyest insult ever directed at me on Unfogged.
I don't think it's smooth, but it's not really smarmy either.
lest I develop an ego all of a sudden
You say that like it's a bad thing.
It's like the converse of newspapers with me, JM: I'm totally right about the 5% of things of which you have personal knowledge.
It's this phrase---in case i had more on my mind. :)---that annoys me. I've figured out that the problem is a tense problem: it should be "in case i had had more..." unless he wants to reserve the possibility of still having more in mind in a grammatically unclear sort of way.
So quickly this sort of thing goes from pity to contempt. Poor guy.
The boy isn't smooth, but there's no reason not to allow face to be saved by redefining the interaction. Or, 161+162, I guess.
Man, it's a sorry old world when ogged is right, but in 166 he totally is.
Consider the other possibility. Or possibilities: people often have multiple agendas without strong commitments to any of them. Maybe this is such a case, and he's signaling that just hanging out remains appealing.
So quickly this sort of thing goes from pity to contempt. Poor guy.
See, this is why it's better to allow the reframing. Pitying someone under the circumstances seems to me a species of vanity, and contempt a vehicle for relieving one's own feelings of awkwardness.
Oh, I think he was just doing a little face-saving there, which is understandable, and it will make going out together far less stressful for both of you. JM does the right thing!
Geez you people are harsh. Yes, he should have invited the boyfriend along as well, but that's about the worst I can say about this.
167 is right. Can none of you can understand the desire for friendly banter or flirtation without some sort of crush?
So wait, JM, the studio? You have a post?
167 is right. Can none of you can understand the desire for friendly banter or flirtation without some sort of crush?
Friendly banter, yes. Flirtation, no.
175: this is why everyone needs to be trained up from infancy in the proper use of the subjunctive.
You should go for the drink, then spend the whole time giggling coyly and batting your eyelashes.
183: I was wondering when w-lfs-n would pop in to make that observation.
You should go for the drink, then spend the whole time giggling coyly and batting your eyelashes.
...since, as a teetotaler, you can't credibly say, "Oh my, I'm feeling so tipsy. What's in this drink?"
And 177 further refines my feelings! SCMT gunning for the win!
Lacking any strong feelings as to whether something becomes physical or just friendly is the default. 161 is wrong because it assumes the guy really wanted to get into JM's pants rather than just accepting that it may or may not be a possibility.
Friendly banter, yes. Flirtation, no.
You are leading an unnecessarily impoverished life. Married people who will not cheat flirt all of the time. Sometimes in comments here.
I'm like Kibo, except with counterfactuals, jussives, and the like.
188: Yes, thereby implying that they are attracted to the person they're flirting with. But not implying that an actual chance for intimacy exists.
We've had this discussion before. Personally I don't flirt with people I don't find attractive. Others may differ.
188: Seriously. Is most of the stuff here now to be regarded as a prelude to cheating?
So quickly this sort of thing goes from pity to contempt. Poor guy.
Pity and contempt are closely allied. Neither bodes well for a friendly drink of any sort.
178 strikes me as completely correct.
Married people who will not cheat with me, dammit flirt all of the time.
Is most of the stuff here now to be regarded as a prelude to cheating?
How did we get here? I'm talking about the particular case. There's lots of friendly flirting in the world.
Pitying someone under the circumstances seems to me a species of vanity, and contempt a vehicle for relieving one's own feelings of awkwardness.
Gulp.
So wait, JM, the studio? You have a post?
No, but you should check out my Flickr page.
Pitying someone under the circumstances seems to me a species of vanity
This is true, but not all vanity is misplaced.
This is true, but not all vanity is misplaced.
Vanity is always misplaced, that's the point of the word.
Personally I don't flirt with people I don't find attractive.
I guess that's true, but just because someone's attractive doesn't mean I really want to sleep with them. Part of this is also because I know sex just isn't going to happen with the vast vast vast majority of people I find attractive, this is a big city with lots of hot people and most of them aren't attracted to me or have significant others. Such is life. So I don't really consider sex a priority when I go out or meet new people, my main desire is to just have a nice conversation with someone I could see being friends with. Flirtation isn't a sign I really want to boff someone, it's just a sign that I think they're cute and an interesting person to hang out with.
Basically, I'm saying that J/sh isn't 100% lying, he's probably just 10-25% lying, depending on how cool and how hott he thinks she is.
194: We got there, presumably, on the assumption that friendly flirting was something that signified wanting to get in someone's pants.
Did I not say that I am hotter than ten thousand suns?
200: Actually, that makes it even easier for the guy. The couple times I went out with a ridiculously good-looking girl who was very interesting and fun to hang out with, I really never expected anything beyond friendship to happen. I mean, she was so ridiculously hot! Not remotely likely!
Vanity is always misplaced, that's the point of the word.
I don't think so. See 3a. That's right, Ben, I did it.
I'm off for a bit...
What kind of an uncouth, woman hating asshole uses an emoticon in an e-mail? This dude should just off himself right now, seriously. What an inexcusably awful slice of evil this tool has turned out to be.
Also, would it kill the rest of you to be nicer?
I'm just glad to see you've come around, o-man.
Oh hell, the only thing I might have done differently in JM's position would have been to try to get the guy's email address in return (assuming thinking on your feet well enough), and then sent a message fairly soon plainly saying that I wasn't sure whether the invitation was intended to be for a date, in which case we should be clear.
As for the guy's response, the emoticon is silly, but a lot of people use them unselfconsciously. Without it, the reply is perfectly in keeping with his finding JM's worry that he wanted to get into her pants charming.
As for the general claim upthread that when men and women get together, the guy has *ideas*, bollocks. I don't know why anyone would feel the need to insist that this is the case. But as JM says, operating on that assumption is pretty isolating. Get a girlfriend/boyfriend: suddenly lose friends of the opposite gender (assuming heterosexuality).
Get a girlfriend/boyfriend: suddenly lose friends of the opposite gender
This assumes you have single friends of the opposite gender to lose.
159: PGD, just buy the Kimono Maxx.
||
Suggestions for a Friday night dinner? Sifu suggested soft shell crabs and fiddleheads in the other thread, facetiously I'm sure, but soft shell crabs are actually kind of pricy.
Quick, easy with vegetables, to be cooked in an apartment that tends to heat up but does have A/C.
|>
207: Well, yes, according to those rules, you can keep friends of the opposite sex who are in relationships. Possibly you can flirt with them, though I tend not to do that if I'm in a relationship; opinions differ.
The rules are arcane.
JM, Ogged's right. The only thing I'd have done differently, I guess, might have been to be less terse and maybe say something like "i'm feeling guilty because I don't know if I mentioned my bf, but I would really like to go hang out and chat" kind of thing. Like, you know, throw some reassurance in there that he did the right thing and is a worthy human being.
208: I wasn't being facetious! I think a Land of the Lost themed dinner plate would be completely awesome.
I did not, however, really expect you to cook it.
You could use mashed sweet potatoes as dusty red hills! This would definitely be pricey, but arrange some frog legs so it looks like the giant crab is eating a dinosaur!
Oh man, that would be awesome.
Personally I don't flirt with people I don't find attractive. Others may differ.
I flirt with anybody who comes within a 30-foot radius of me.
I flirt with anybody who comes within a 30-foot radius of me.
And I flirt with no one.
212: what if they're on the other side of a wall?
what if they're on the other side of a wall?
Typically, the Department of Corrections provides a telephone to facilitate communication in these circumstances.
Typically, the Department of Corrections provides a telephone to facilitate communication in these circumstances.
Not true! You can go inside and talk to somebody in prison in the visiting room without a wall!
216/217: or as we see here, you can use email.
what if they're on the other side of a wall?
My superkoranic flirtatio power will BANISH THAT WALL.
what if they're on the other side of a wall?
He uses one of those handy little holes. They're usually about waist height.
I like to flirt with people I don't find attractive, but who can be useful to me.
I think JM's young admirer came out of this pretty well.
He uses one of those handy little holes. They're usually about waist height.
I think the proper term is "anus," asilon.
Is a five-year age difference once you're into your 30s something to be remarked?
the Department of Corrections provides a telephone to facilitate communication
At the risk of going all Andy Rooney, government agencies should not euphemize their function. Dept. of Corrections my Aunt Fanny, you're the Dept. of Punishment fer cryin' out loud. Bring back the Dept. of War, so that there is less confusion.
government agencies should not euphemize their function. Dept. of Corrections my Aunt Fanny
A while back I had occasion to through the prison town where my mother used to work. The sign by the road that used to indicate the direction to the "Reformatory" now says "Prison Farm".
One of the kindest ways I was rejected, when I asked a guy to see a movie was "I don't know if this applies--but I'm seeing someone. But I'd really like to go see a movie with you." Still friends with the dude. So I've always gone with that, although no one ever asks me out. Much nicer than a hard rejection, and there's still plausible deniability that I was just asking "as friends." Which I wasn't. But I could have, somewhat plausibly.