Fourth date: should I invite the guy over to watch DVDs if I don't plan on having sex

[zengirl]

I'm showing my age. Multi-dating didn't exist back in my day. The OP, apparently is a traditional soul like me too, or so we're led to believe. From my perspective, I know what I want in a partner. I compare and judge everything I see before me according to my own set of criteria. Multi-dating, to me, judges people off against each other moreso, if not instead of, what we should think is important to each one of us. Not revealing certain dating behaviors - hey I'm dating others, you OK with that - doesn't come across to me as a person with good communication skill either. But hey, that's just how I see things.

It probably is an age thing. I don't know anyone -- male or female -- who jumps into exclusivity, really.

 

I don't think I judge people against each other. I've known pretty clearly what I wanted at each stage of my life so far, and looked for that in dating partners. I just don't know how to discern that all before a date/on a first/second/third date. . . I mean, half the things I really care about (spirituality, religion and politics, for example) don't come up on early dates. I like to get to know people. It's not a competition. It's just a more effective means of scheduling things, for me.

[denise_xo]

So, what happened on the date?!

 

(I quit lurking and registered to ask this question!)

 

:lmao:

[donnamaybe]

Point it out the misrepresentations please.

First of all, let's read for content, shall we? I said MISINTERPRETATION which is a FAR CRY from misrepresentation. That misinterpretation I spoke of was you and VV feeling free to misinterpret the mere invitation for dinner and a movie as a "signal that sex may occur" (You DID agree with his post, after all). Now I fully understand there are SOME males who have this notion that dinner and a movie that THEY have provided means they are expecting sex later. That's a misconception, once again, but some guys are just like that I guess. But we know that type and when we figure them out, they get kicked to the curb. Most women, on the other hand, enjoy providing creature comforts - that's just our "Women are from Venus" thing. Please don't "misinterpret" "creature comforts" to mean sex.

I'm still waiting for the text that supports your belief that having a guy over for dinner and dvd watching equates to full-on sexual intercourse. That it means sex in the eyes of ‘vv’ as opposed to what he actually alluded to, that being its an indicator, a signal that sex may take place.

I fail to understand the difference. Either way, he's still placing blame on the OP in that he claims she is giving out "a signal that sex may take place."

[Phateless]

I'm not playing the blame game. I'm simply highlighting what certain behaviors may mean. And while you're right, we're not responsible for how others feel (funny that, in the context of some of the responses within this thread), not presenting the full picture, being economical with the truth, especially if you hold a view that runs counter the the norm, isn't the most responsible behavior around either. For example, we know that most women want relationships, hopefully, of the long-term, meaningful variety. Some men are known to want everything but the long-term component of a relationship. In this situation, I believe that men should be upfront with this belief, to help avoid confusion and misunderstanding, especially further down the line when feelings are well n truly developed.

 

In short, if you have views or beliefs that run counter to the established norm, I think that you have a degree of responsibility to make these known. In relation to the OP, sex is not a happening thing with her anytime soon. She needs some form of reassurance over and above the typical norm it appears. I don't have a problem with that but I suggest that she be a little more upfront about this, if no other reason than to avoid possible confusion. Matter of fact, she should get into the habit of being more upfront about her feelings in general, if for no other reason than to limit confusion. Confusion after all is the result of poor communication more often than not. Having said all that, I understand that its far from easy for some people to be so open, honest and direct. But, something to keep in mind nonetheless.

 

Here you go again, telling us how to behave. Sorry, but this is not your decision to make. Once you put your views out there - they're open for one and all. And as long as we both keep within the theme of what's been discussed and do so in a respectful manner, then that's all we can or should ask for.

 

Blind Freddy, or shall we say, the more relationship experienced among us, can see that her behavior, her interest level in this guy, isn't up to the levels that it'll suggest that something meaningful, for them both, is likely to take place here. Her overall dating and relationship history further bears this out.

 

I'm not worried about protecting men. I will speak for the unspoken, I will point things out for the less well informed, I will educate, where practical, that much is true.

 

Absolutely not, but then I'm old-fashioned. One of the first questions anyone with half a brain should ask. And thinking like yours and the OP's is the reason why.

 

Do you wish to try and justify this latest allegation? So damn easy around here to make accusations around here, near impossible for some - to back them up.

 

Feel free to counter - that's always been an option here. Attack the message instead of the messenger for change.

 

 

.

 

You're nitpicking the language instead of discussing the points I was trying to make. Enough games, I'm done talking to you.

[A O]

It probably is an age thing. I don't know anyone -- male or female -- who jumps into exclusivity, really.

Dating to me, apart from getting to know someone is a snapshot of what we'll be like in a relationship. I do find it strange that people need exclusivity in a relationship sense but find it rather odd in a dating sense. Never could understand the thinking behind this.

 

I don't think I judge people against each other. I've known pretty clearly what I wanted at each stage of my life so far, and looked for that in dating partners.

Thank you. So there are people out there who can judge people against their own requirements rather than against each other, and not allow the latter to influence their decision to any great degree. Not come across the likes of you - ever, and boy I've seen a lot of dating threads in my time.

 

 

.

First of all, let's read for content, shall we? I said MISINTERPRETATION which is a FAR CRY from misrepresentation

Fair call. Got the word wrong - didn't get the meaning wrong however.

 

That misinterpretation I spoke of was you and VV feeling free to misinterpret the mere invitation for dinner and a movie as a "signal that sex may occur" (You DID agree with his post, after all).

That's not a misinterpretation. Most people here got this - even the OP, eventually. Not to mention that inviting someone over often does lead to sex. It is a signal, it can 'mean' that sex 'may' happen. What it doesn't mean however is that sex 'should' happen. An 'expectation' yes, a 'right' - no.

 

Now I fully understand there are SOME males who have this notion that dinner and a movie that THEY have provided means they are expecting sex later. That's a misconception, once again, but some guys are just like that I guess. But we know that type and when we figure them out, they get kicked to the curb. Most women, on the other hand, enjoy providing creature comforts - that's just our "Women are from Venus" thing. Please don't "misinterpret" "creature comforts" to mean sex.

Expectations are fine. Men expect sex, women expect relationship (potential). Nothing wrong with either expectation. You kick men to the curb if their expectations don't match yours. In a sense, I'm telling men to kick women to the curb if their expectations aren't being met either. The default setting has always been whatever women want matters most. That perception needs to change to whatever men want matters also.

 

I fail to understand the difference. Either way, he's still placing blame on the OP in that he claims she is giving out "a signal that sex may take place."

Looking at her behavior across the board and not simply that little snippet - is he laying blame or pointing out inconsistent - muddled behavior? I suggest the latter.

 

 

.

You're nitpicking the language instead of discussing the points I was trying to make. Enough games, I'm done talking to you.

No game playing, very, very, very little nit-picking but a whole heap of discussion and debating point after point after point is how I operate, and is how I have operated here. Disappointing that you would end discussion in this manner.

 

 

.

[silverfish]

 

Fair call. Got the word wrong - didn't get the meaning wrong however.

 

.

 

Misrepresenting misinterpretation?.....someone needs to work on his communication skills.

[SpanksTheMonkey]

So, what happened on the date?!

 

(I quit lurking and registered to ask this question!)

 

I know I was thinking the same thing I can see if the op is a little fed up but she could at least let us know how it went if nothing else ***Sigh*** Sniff** Sniff**

[carhill]

She got suspended. You'll notice a lot of posts are missing. She posted about the incident early one morning right after Crenshaw inquired about an update and it was removed. I saw it in e-mail. IMO, watching DVD's with a date at a friend's house is *likely* more healthy than the effects that this thread was having on her. Hope it works out for her.

 

Edited to add that things might of gone well, as she commented on 'hot vs pretty' this morning

Edited July 22, 2010 by carhill

[donnamaybe]

Misrepresenting misinterpretation?.....someone needs to work on his communication skills.

 

Ya think?