How to meet people...

[jbsegal]

[Poll #180276]

Comments

[whitebird.livejournal.com]

Of course, it depends on your actual audience. If you know the person is of a similar bent and has dealt with proposistions of a smilar nature before, then sure, "You're cute, wanna fuck?" is fine.

If it's someone whose sexual proclivities you're not sure on, an expression of interest in the person without dropping in the intimate contact would be more appropriate.

[xeger.livejournal.com]

IMHO it's more pertinant to know how the person is likely to react, than what their sexual proclivities are ;> If it's somebody that's been hanging around the poly crowd for ages, even if they're not poly themselves, it's pretty sure that they'll recognize the compliment.

Then again, I'm of the opinion that a polite question, left unpressed, is rarely a bad thing. JB's phrase is infinitely more polite than many pickup lines, and the suggestion of tea is far more civilized than "Wanna drink?".

[maedbh7.livejournal.com]

If it's somebody that's been hanging around the poly crowd for ages, even if they're not poly themselves, it's pretty sure that they'll recognize the compliment.

I think I was rather assuming that you would only be asking in the various communities where such a question would be taken in it's proper context. That said, I do agree with many of the people who expressed that, for a 'normal' person (ie -not- poly, elboid, SCA, kink, etc...) the 'intimate' part would drive them instantly away (ie most normal folks find the truth very scary).

Then, too, it depends: are you looking for a sexual partner (and possible anything else) or are you looking for a new primary/secondary (and possible anything else)? If what you want is a primary/secondary, then yeah, skip the intimacy line; you'll have the time to get around to that later. If, however, what you want is the sexual connection, then why waste your time on the courtship? Cut straight to the negotiation. IMO. YMMV. All standard disclaimers apply, -H...

[zogathon.livejournal.com]

most normal folks find the truth very scary

Not that I'd ever claim to be normal, but the intimacy line turned me off because I found it a bit rude for a first meeting, rather than because I thought it was scary in any way.

Just a minor point worth correcting.

[maedbh7.livejournal.com]

I'm curious to know why it seems rude to you. What about it is rude? Define 'rude'. -H...(who is not trying to start a flame war here, but doesn't understand how honesty ever equals rudeness)

[zogathon.livejournal.com]

Rude might be the wrong word--I hemmed over it, but ultimately couldn't come up with anything better. Something more than off-putting, anyway.

Anyway, while I consider honesty a vital part of any relationship (romantic or otherwise) I'm in, I also consider general social *niceness* as necessary. Hence, the following two statements:

"Those jeans make your ass look huge; you should change into something else"

"Those jeans aren't really flattering; how about this other thing that emphasizes your (good quality here)?"

They're both honest. And I'd rather hear the first than nothing at all! But I'd rather hear the second by far. And it's kind of the same thing for me between "I'd like to be intimate with you, can we have tea?" and "I think you're cool and would like to know you better, can we have tea?"

The second tells me everything I need to know about someone new: they find me attractive, they want to know more, they're willing to do so in an unassuming setting. The first gives me ambiguous additional information:

- They might not care about whether we could *like* each other, and are only interested in sex.
- They might be trying to warn me that if there *won't* be sex, I'm not interesting enough to warrant friendship.
- They might be trying to let me know that they like a quick progression to physical intimacy if it's going to happen at all....

...and more stuff, really. All of which I find a bit presumptuous and rushing. So I guess what I find rude (if that's the word) about it is the bypassing of social foreplay that I find necessary and soothing. It's the difference between honesty and full disclosure, and the reason I wouldn't tell someone what a neat freak I am before I knew there was a chance in hell of us living together. :)

Unless, of course, the whole point is to pick up a new strictly sex buddy. But JB phrased the start of the conversation in a more general way than that.

Does this help?

[wispfox.livejournal.com]

"I think you're cool and would like to know you better, can we have tea?"

Indeed. Of the two, this one is one that I prefer as well. Although, I might suggest that replacing 'cool' with 'cute' does a better job of indicating physical attraction, for those people with whom clue-sticks are necessary. :)

As well, I agree about the ambiguity of the question involving intimacy - I also would not be sure (although already having a sense of the person asking would help) if there is an assumption of complete lack of interest if intimacy isn't going to happen. It would strike me oddly, and might make me a little uncomfortable, as while I am perfectly fine and happy with friendly relationships which include sex, there needs to be the 'friends' aspect involved.

[maedbh7.livejournal.com]

Yes, that does help :)

"Those jeans make your ass look huge; you should change into something else" and "Those jeans aren't really flattering; how about this other thing that emphasizes your (good quality here)?"

See, what I would rather hear is "Those jeans make your ass look huge; how about this other thing that emphasizes your good quality?" The beginning lets me know exactly what about the jeans they find unflattering; the ending lets me know they care enough about me to suggest something that will make me look good in their opinion.

Likewise, "I find you attractive and would love to be intimate with you sometime; will you have tea with me?" tells me from the beginning that the person finds me physically attractive (while "I find you interesting" suggests to me that they find my mind, my habits, or my hobbies interesting, but not necessarily my body) and it admits/tells me that they want to pursue a sexual relationship of some level at some unspecified date in the future (tho probably sooner rather than later); meanwhile the ending tells me that they are willing to talk and negotiate terms and boundaries. And that they like tea.

It sounds like some of the difference in what people prefer has everything to do with what subtexts each of us reads into what is actually said. Which is unfortunate, entirely to be expected, and something for JB to bear in mind as he pursues all his current interests. :) -H...

[merde.livejournal.com]

it is rude to presume intimacy with a stranger, by the 'normal' rules of etiquette. this is why you don't walk up to a stranger and say "honey, those pants aren't working for you," where you might say it to your best friend. and you don't announce your desire to have sex with a stranger for the same reason -- it presumes intimacy.

obviously a request for a date implies a desire for sex at some point in the future -- if both parties are still agreeable after getting to know each other. but throwing it all out in the open like that to someone who's not expecting it is startling and uncomfortable for most people. saying something like that to the average person on the street is going to come across as wildly inappropriate, socially clueless, and, yes, rude.

it's important to follow the general social rules for whatever society you're in, if you want to get along with people. the poly community has its own etiquette, and you'd be offended or insulted if someone wandered in and started ignoring those rules willy-nilly -- so why do you find it hard to understand that people would react poorly to an even more widely accepted set of social rules?

[maedbh7.livejournal.com]

obviously a request for a date implies a desire for sex at some point in the future

Does it? My understanding was that a request for a date was a request to spend more time with someone, period. For some people, yes, the desire for sex is implied. For others, no, sex is not implied in that request at all. I'd say, based on personal observation and discussion thus far of JB's poll, that what you've stated is true for about half the people, and is equally Not True for the other half. (And that is a break within gender lines and not a break between genders - for some men and for some women, sex is implied; for the rest of the men and the rest of the women, sex is not even remotely implied.)

and you don't announce your desire to have sex with a stranger for the same reason -- it presumes intimacy.

I would propose that for some people, sex is a means to achieving intimacy; for other people, intimacy is a means to achieving sex. Some people are fine with having sex in a way that does not include emotional/mental/spiritual intimacy; other people are fine with e/m/s intimacy that never includes sex. To each their own, so long as each is allowed their own.

so why do you find it hard to understand that people would react poorly to an even more widely accepted set of social rules?

I understand that people react poorly to widely accepted social mores and folkways all the time; that does not make those social mores or folkways right, informed, or kind. Reference how sexual minorities are treated in this country.

it's important to follow the general social rules for whatever society you're in, if you want to get along with people.

It is my opinion that one should follow one's best informed judgement as to what is morally right/good/lawful and act accordingly, even if that best judgment flies in the face of every social more around. It is my opinion that it is vastly more important to engage your mind, your heart, and your spirit regardless of what society tells you, if you want to live any kind of life worth living. -H...

(Note to JB: If you would like myself and others to take this discussion elsewhere before we get flames and char all over your LJ, do please let us know.)

[dbang.livejournal.com]

If it's somebody that's been hanging around the poly crowd for ages, even if they're not poly themselves, it's pretty sure that they'll recognize the compliment.

Eh? I've been on the fringes of poly for ages, not sure what that has to do with anything. I was put off by the order of things: "want to have tea?" ( = "I don't know you very well yet") after "I'd like to be intimate with you". To me it isn't complimentary that someone wants to fuck me without knowing me...much more complimentary to want to fuck me after getting to know me.

My preference for getting to know people before deciding whether to boff 'em (and them getting to know me before deciding likewise) has nothing to do with how many lovers I have.

Also, being "complimented" doesn't stop one from feeling squicky about how one is approached. Not that JB's proposed line would squick me, but I've gotten plenty of proposals that were both complimentary ("You're hot") and squickful ("I'm going to lurk around you until you admit you think I'm hot too").

[dbang.livejournal.com]

I suppose as context for this I ought to add that even when I'm just seeking casual sexual relations, I still want to get to know the person, because what turns me on is what is between someone's ears. I simply don't respond sexually to mere visuals.

[blk]

I agree wholeheartedly here. As much as I love being complimented on my appearance, and as much as I want my lovers to be turned on by my physical appearance, I want someone to be interested in getting with me because I'm an interesting person, not because I'm pretty.

Or, as was said here, it's just not very complimentary to hear that someone wants to fuck me before getting to know me. Sure, I know people think it, but I don't want to hear it.

The proposed line here wouldn't squick me, but it would likely get an automatic "no," no matter who the person was. I'd prefer people leave out the "attractive" and "want to fuck you" parts completely when they're trying to "get to know me." Approach me on something else - the book I'm reading, my dance skills, my sense of humor, a common interest. Compliment me on my looks after I've agreed to a date, and bring up the sexual interest when it might be mutual.

But, as always, YMMV. I'm a little more uptight about these things than many other crowds, I think.

[zogathon.livejournal.com]

Heh. You did a *much* better job explaining my instinctive "That's a bit presumptuous and rude; I'd just have to say no" reaction than I did above. :) Thanks.

[koshmom.livejournal.com]

agreed. The intimacy part can come after you have the cup of tea to get to know the person a little better. The original sounded a bit like "Hi, I don't know you, do you want to have sex? We can discuss diseases and contraception methods over a cup of tea before we go do it."

yeah, I read it that way too...

[bluepapercup]

"We can discuss diseases and contraception methods over a cup of tea before we go do it."

heh, indeed. timing is everything.

[exponentialdk.livejournal.com]

The intimacy part can come after you have the cup of tea

Exactly. That's why it was rude for me, at dinner last Thursday, to ask your LJ username upon meeting you, even though you preferred to be introduced with your real name. (My apologies.) You are a person first, and have a particular attribute second. To suggest otherwise is demeaning.

I think the different reactions to JB's proposed line depend on whether the (hypothetical) recipient considers the order of social interaction to be indicative of the order of importance. To make a blanket, overly-general, sexist statement on the topic: Women tend to want love first, sex second, while men tend to want sex first, love second.

In the case of dinner last week, I didn't care more about your LJ presence than about you as a person. I'm one of these people who needs to interpret communication in context (e.g. always reading the mail headers), so I wanted to know in what context to interpret your conversation at the table. But I was being a clumsy social oaf in how I acquired that context. (And then standoffish because I had offended you.)

Social interaction is way too complicated. But it can be a fascinating spectator sport!

[koshmom.livejournal.com]

Oh, I wasn't insulted by the dinner conversation. I'm sorry I gave you that impression. I actually didn't even realize you didn't already know me by my real name!

Of course, if you'd like, you can apologize in person over a cup of tea?

[exponentialdk.livejournal.com]

Tea is good. Lack of expectation is also good.
:-)

I don't know how to contact you, but my email address is in my profile.

[cyan-blue.livejournal.com]

Agreed with the above. Someone suggested the line "I think you're cool and would like to know you better, can we have tea?" - that would make me far happier than the phrasing that suggested intimacies right off as well. For myself, if I don't know someone well, I'd rather they first try to get to know me as a person, and then see if a sensual vibe grows between us from there.

The suggestion of intimacies from a relative stranger would make me feel uncomfortable, because it implies that there is a set script all ready, a narrowing of options. There is the implication that if I don't want to have intimacies, but do want to have tea, the person asking will be disappointed. There is also the sense, in your original proposed wording, that the tea is just a prelude to intimacies, rather than something valuable in itself.

[moominmolly.livejournal.com]

To me it isn't complimentary that someone wants to fuck me without knowing me...much more complimentary to want to fuck me after getting to know me.

Yup. I agree with zogathon, that I'd be much less put off by an approach that started with "you're interesting! let's talk about stuff!" than by one that says "I'd like to be intimate with you". I prefer to be seen (and approached) as interesting first and hot second. :)

[hawkegirl.livejournal.com]

I know I personally really appriciate honesty and directness. Like I appriciate it ALOT, if someone can just lay their cards on the table I feel like it's probably atleast worth experimenting (assuming I have the desire with said person) because I feel we'll atleast probably be able to be honest and communicating whatever happens. I would say though if it was someone I didn't know at all, like someone off the street or something I would not respond well.

Go you!

what they said....

[electriccat.livejournal.com]

You need to find that happy middle ground between bluntness and subtlety.

Plus, "intimate" is such a bizarre word for some people - sorta like how some prefer the phrase "do the horizontal bop" to "make love" ;->

I agree with the other comments about taking time to get to know the person's temperament, mindset, etc. before you have it set in your mind that you want to proceed to the fun stuff. It's quite possible that the person in question is quite babelicious, desirable, sexy as all getout... but you find that (after a few light 'dates') they're quite insane and could throw your life into complete disarray should you choose to become intimately involved.

[bluepapercup]

I think that the major problem with your line, while being very honest and putting the real point on the table right away, is that for a lot of people there are subtexts and assumptions that go along with pickup lines in general, not to mention one that pairs "attractive" and "intimate". I think that it's far to easy to push the wrong buttons with words like that. As stated above by others, it could get a little difficult to tell what the purpose of the tea is if all you're really looking for is a purely physical friendship.

But you might say, I'm looking for *more* than that. Well, it's would be a bit hard to tell. I think there'd have to be a lot of assuming going on by both parties, and unless you're a mind reader (which I gather you're not) that usually leads to at least some sort of hurt or squashed feeling later.

Personally, if someone came at me with a line like that, I'd be a bit taken aback. I'd be intrigued, probably laugh, and be flattered, but wary enough of the directness that I wouldn't want to purse that person, out of the concern that anything non-sexual would simply be a perfunctory effort to put me at ease, which I find a bit...crass.

Honestly, it's really about personal interpetation. So then since everyone has different issues that they superimpose onto interatctions, it gets far too easy to step on toes and drive possible interests away.

[coffeekitty.livejournal.com]

In the general case, I would respond to the statement as written with "what the hell? uh. no."

I'd be more likely to respond positively (again, this is a generalization) to "i find you interesting and would like to get to know you better. tea sometime?"

[skreeky]

Someone I've never seen before in my life: *slap*

Someone I have seen in passing but never conversed with would merit a very sarcastic: "I'm sorry, I am never INTIMATE with anyone that shallow. Goodbye."

Someone I know better than that, I would PROBABLY be more careful how I phrased it (although I would find this particular proposition insulting enough it might be even harsher - I do actually find it insulting that this implies I am not worth getting to know if I do not in fact wish to fuck you). In any case, the answer would amount to the same thing. I'm not really intersted in knowing, let alone "being intimate" with someone who doesn't care about anything but my body.

I find this particular phrasing even more disturbing, because it is implying that agreeing to have tea with you means I am agreeing to have sex with you. I don't even get a chance to have one date before I get to decide whether we fuck?? It usually takes me at least 3 full dates to decide whether someone is fuckable, and I still consider that to be on a pretty shallow level.

I might suggest they go find someone who feels differently about it. After all, if bodies are all you want they are aplenty, and many of them contain people who don't have the same requirements that I would before a roll in the hay. And as one guy I know points out, if you use a line like that 100 times and 99 people turn you down, you still got laid.

[maedbh7.livejournal.com]

Imagine that, I found even *more* things to add to this discussion. But I'm trying to be a good girl and not totally use your space as if it were my own. Therefore, you can find the rest of my thoughts over at my own LJ, Maedbh7

Thanks for the poll; it's been very engaging :) -H...

[sauergeek.livejournal.com]

I'm one of the "something else" crowd, because my reaction to that would depend entirely on what I thought of the person saying it. I'm unlikely to slap anyone, and I may well outright accept or reject the offer. More likely I would just stand there with my mouth hanging open until I managed to get my brain sufficiently in gear to come up with some other response. My most likely response (once my brain re-engaged past "duh..." stage) would be evasive action, both mental and physical, but that's just me.

[intuition-ist.livejournal.com]

so, first thing: this strikes me as a rather endearing thing to say to someone you already know and would like to have a romp in the hay with (especially if they've acted like they're interested during previous interactions). in that context, it's roughly equivalent to "hey babe, come up & see me sometime" from a woman.

i think you'd have to be james bond in order to get a positive response from a stranger.

second thing: i think it's rather amusing that you only got two slaps out of the 38 people who answered the poll... the general populace would probably be much less tolerant of such a line.

tea, anyone? :>

--S.