quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath
No. I am of "the group" that thinks no means maybe, maybe. Guys are generally expected to take risk when approaching a woman and that's because one cannot really always take a woman's response at face value because she is indeed expecting to be pursued and that pursuit not to be so very easy.

This means the guy must not only listen to her but read her body language and make a snap judgement on which direction to go with her and sometimes we judge wrong and sometimes we judge right but in every situation if we read her body signal wrong then we will judge wrong. Here's the catch on cmail approaches...well, you can see the problem for guys without having me spell it out. You see, we guys, the real ones looking to date, in honestly making an approach are missing that critical tool we do depend on and that is her body communication and that is the one we have learned to place so much dependence on and for good reason.

So on CM and other sites we are working with one hand tied behind our back. This means we still don't totally depend on what she says and do make mistakes but we know not to give up easily from our experience in the real world. So perhaps we should not be judged so critically. Perhaps we should.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath

I do indeed "want an actual answer" and am listening without any attempt to really sway an opinion. I thought that would be best but *sigh* it appears one cannot satisfy every woman with a single approach and why would I even think that the case? *Groan*.

quote:

*sigh* it appears one cannot satisfy every woman with a single approach and why would I even think that the case? *Groan*.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath

I do indeed "want an actual answer" and am listening without any attempt to really sway an opinion. I thought that would be best but *sigh* it appears one cannot satisfy every woman with a single approach and why would I even think that the case? *Groan*.

You say that trying again has worked for you in the past.

So question: to how many offline dates has that tactic lead?

Considering how unanimous the consensus among women on the board here is (all women whom I know for a fact to actually be real women, who when they're looking all follow through and actually meet with men offline), I've gotta wonder if your 'success' with trying again, and ignoring a 'no' is strictly limited to women who either A) aren't actually women, or B) had no intention to follow through to begin with and are just having some sexy fun chatting online.

I can fully see how a woman who's just looking for a couple of kinky chats (or even phone calls) would be fine if you tried again, because she doesn't plan on meeting you anyways. But if every time you're tried again it hasn't ever lead to an offline date, considering how all women here who do date offline are against it, I have to wonder whether your feeling that the tactic of 'trying again after a no' working for you is actually accurate...

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath
No. I am of "the group" that thinks no means maybe, maybe. Guys are generally expected to take risk when approaching a woman and that's because one cannot really always take a woman's response at face value because she is indeed expecting to be pursued and that pursuit not to be so very easy.

This means the guy must not only listen to her but read her body language and make a snap judgement on which direction to go with her and sometimes we judge wrong and sometimes we judge right but in every situation if we read her body signal wrong then we will judge wrong. Here's the catch on cmail approaches...well, you can see the problem for guys without having me spell it out. You see, we guys, the real ones looking to date, in honestly making an approach are missing that critical tool we do depend on and that is her body communication and that is the one we have learned to place so much dependence on and for good reason.

So on CM and other sites we are working with one hand tied behind our back. This means we still don't totally depend on what she says and do make mistakes but we know not to give up easily from our experience in the real world. So perhaps we should not be judged so critically. Perhaps we should.

Bullshit. You are excusing behavior that is NOT acceptable.

"NO" is one of the simplest words on the planet. The problem is, too many people who ignore it are too busy saying "me".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quiette

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath

I do indeed "want an actual answer" and am listening without any attempt to really sway an opinion. I thought that would be best but *sigh* it appears one cannot satisfy every woman with a single approach and why would I even think that the case? *Groan*.

I thought this was funny btw. A girl says no and you initially ignore her and feel the need to push and find out what she really means. A girl asks for (you know, actually requests) an answer to something she genuinely wants to know more about and you initial deny said interaction (for your own reasons, which you are allowed to do). Case A: The girl says no to further interaction and you say yes. Case B: A girl says yes to further interaction and you say no. So I had to ask you twice for some follow up and when you finally gave it, how did you respond?

quote:

*sigh* it appears one cannot satisfy every woman with a single approach and why would I even think that the case? *Groan*.

Oh dear. Annoyed?

It appears we girls cannot satisfy every man we're not interested in with a single approach such as saying 'no'. And why would we even think that the case? Groooaaan.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath
Okay. Who is not listening now?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath

I am a bit surprised that a thread asking for input seems to be filled with women, not all but certainly the majority, wanting my response to their input. I did not plan on being the focus of these posts but do enjoy the attention because while the responses seem to be negative I still appreciate them since not everything in life is made of ice cream and sometimes a new scar or two is good for a guy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath
Okay. Who is not listening now?

I took what you said. To you, "no" means maybe. That's not how it works.

This exact line of thinking is precisely *why* we have come to critical mass in regard to consent violation in our communities. If they only say no once, and you're going for the maybe, is it sexual assault or not? When a person has a stalker, and they say 'leave me alone,' is it ok if they are continued to be terrorized? "Stop calling me" doesn't mean maybe you should continue with phone harassment.

"No" should be the end of the matter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quiette

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath

I am a bit surprised that a thread asking for input seems to be filled with women, not all but certainly the majority, wanting my response to their input. I did not plan on being the focus of these posts but do enjoy the attention because while the responses seem to be negative I still appreciate them since not everything in life is made of ice cream and sometimes a new scar or two is good for a guy.

Times he's stated his appreciation of responses on the thread he started?: About a million
Number of my questions answered out of 3?: 0

I give up and don't know how you regulars deal with this. I'm going back to lurking occasionally.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quiette

You're doing a real good job not answering my question, too. The way I learned in school how to answer questions is to form my answer in a complete sentence so that I can focus on exactly what I'm answering. So in you're case, you'd say...

"'Do not message me again' is ambiguous because..."

And

"One 'do not message me again' isn't good enough for me because..."

And finally

"Yes!/No! (whichever) I require/do not require girls I'm interested in to reject me twice before I believe them."

I guarantee this method should answer my questions that you are so unhappy about not being able to.

*Edited because I forgot the 3rd question*

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath

You are asking how many dates did I get meeting women online and dating them in person and how many of those were obtained using this "tactic" of making a second approach.
I met twelve online and dated them locally in person. Three required a second attempt which met with success, 25% would have been lost to me should I have not used this tactic. The only dates I do are in person.

quote:

"'Do not message me again' is ambiguous because..."

quote:

"'do not message me again' isn't good enough for me because..."

quote:

Edited because I forgot the 3rd question*

quote:

ORIGINAL: ImperialPath
Forgive me. The scope of this conversation is a second and very casual attempt at striking up a conversation. It always was. Don't you think such words as "violation", "sexual assault" or "stalker" or "terrorized" do in no way fit within this context? I certainly do not. I'm getting concerned about some of the experience represented here and I say that without malice.

quote:

You have had 3 offline dates with women who equivalently told you "No, not interested/Don't contact me again" the first time, and changed their mind the second time?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quiette

I don't understand. Why isn't one 'no' good enough for the guy involved again?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quiette

You fucked up quoting and answering the last question, which only required a yes or no. Sorry my formatting was too tough to grasp but far be it for me to ask for you to answer something a 3rd time. According to your original posts, 3 times is when someone is going too far.

quote:

If you are playing with someone and they say "no" but you continue because it might mean maybe, how are you not wrong for refusing to recognize when they said no?