A Single Southern Guy in America

October 19, 2003

Responding #2- Clarifications

For the second response to the "Number" and "Investing" pieces comments, I'll go through and correct/clarify certain items.

Sugarmama suggests~~

Adam, if you are truly picky, you would drop all hopes of ever meeting a "marriageable" woman in a bar. If you're only interested in dating "marriageable" women, then that means you would not partake in the activity of asking out women whom you meet in bars.

My comment below her's responds to the question of whether I try to find girls in bars (I don't), but I should note that I never mentioned anything abut "marriageable girls." That phrase came from other comments.

Catherine misrepresents a few items from the story in her comments~~

ANyway, Adam says that the girl will probably be out with an arrogant guy another night, ...

Actually, I said, "Don�t get me wrong, she may well be out with the arrogant guy the night before or after, or shoot, the day or night of your date�but you can easily get the numbers or a date." Clearly, I noted the possibility, not the probability or certainty that she'd be out with the guy described earlier.

She also adds~~

...but he is arrogant, himself, in the fact that he presumes to practise his "child's play" on a human being and believe it will automatically work...

In reality, the last piece of dialogue from the story says, "Look, there�s nothing to it. Just have faith in yourself and roll the dice. The worst thing that can happen is a woman shoots you down and 99% of the time that has nothing to do with you." Clearly, I fully recognize that it will not "automatically work." The point being communicated that if you have self-confidence it is not that very difficult to approach an unknown women, be it at a bar or some other random place.

She also declares that I "then made a fool of her." I don't think you can draw that from the story. If I had done something to publicly humiliate her, then I could see that.

Holly feels like Yeti is insinuating she is a weak woman. I speak with Holly and Yeti both offline. If you read either of their blogs, I think you'll realize quite quickly that she is not a weak woman and he wouldn't say she is. Her chief complaint is from this comment: "If your dating life is unsatisfactory, it's your fault. Yours. You set the rules. Stamping your feet petulantly and complaining about the actions of others is a sign of weakness."

As I emailed to Holly, I'm sure his comment was meant in a more general sense, as in "If one's dating life is unsatisfactory, it is one's own fault."

As for EVERYONE who has commented that I am thinking about things too much, I will discuss that in another post.

Posted by Adam H at October 19, 2003 07:52 PM ~ Link Cosmos | Trackbacks (0)

Comments

I was aware that you did not specifically mention meeting a marriageable woman, but your blog is centered around your quest to meet "The One". That to me implies that you are not looking for a one night stand, you are looking for a long-term-to-forever type of relationship. Thus, I tied that assumption into the post you wrote about getting the girl's number.

Posted by: sugarmama at October 20, 2003 10:27 AM

Adam, Thank you for clarifying. You are correct, I was incorrect to say you had the possibility noted, not the probability. You were also right on my incorrectly stating that you expected your plan to "automatically" work. On that statement, I was trying more to drive home the point, I think, that you were practicing "child's play" on a human being rather then that you expected it to work. However, it definetly could be read both ways in the way I had written it. The only thing I really have a problem with is your postulation that you did not make a fool of her. You say that, "I don't think you can draw that from the story. If I had done something to publicly humiliate her, then I could see that." Now, the question I have is both in what you consider "public" and what you consider humiliating. I think the display was public because it took place around other people -- including your friend who was well aware of what you were planning to do when you approached the woman. I also think that what is "public" also applies to what is posted on the internet. Since your site probably gets at least a hundred hits a month, its safe to assume that plenty of people are reading about what happened to this woman, and the proof lies in the fact that many people also responded to how you acted towards the woman. Now, one could probably say, this doesn't matter so much because of the fact that you use anonimity in describing the situation. I disagree. WHen someone is stolen from, for instance, whether or not it is within their knowledge that they are being stolen from, it doesn't detract from the fact that they are still being stolen from. I think that it is humiliating to be used as a tool in anyone's game, ESPECIALLY when it comes to attraction, specifically sexual/potential relationship attraction. I would hate to have this done to me - with or without my knowledge of it happening. Having someone make fun of me, and then prove (without my understanding that they think this of me) that I would still be interested in them is the ultimate humiliation actually. Besides, I thought that your "Response to email # 1" indicated an attitude that recognized this. Continueing to defend your actions makes the previous apology almost null and void. Adam, I was perhaps being too critical, everyone judges someone at one time or another and does things that are not so nice even if they are a nice person. I wanted you to recognize that what was done was not such a nice thing to do.

Posted by: Catherine at October 20, 2003 02:59 PM

Catherine. Any guy who has ever successfully received your number has "practiced" on other women to learn the best way of doing so.

Any man who is a good kisser has "practiced" on other women to learn the best way of doing so.

Practice makes perfect.

You are looking at this like women are defenseless little creatures who have to be tricked into action when they like a man.

I tend to think more of women. I see them as equals - capable of flirting, resisting, and raising the stakes.

And thus they should be accountable for their mistakes. If this woman wanted more from Adam - she could have done so.

And we never established that the number she gave him was real. Or whether she had a boyfriend or a husband at home.

And I don't believe you have never used a man to get what you want, or to make another man jealous, or make yourself feel better.

Posted by: TheYeti at October 20, 2003 03:43 PM

Catherine--

I'd have to say that the analogy of theft versus this situation is really an apples and oranges comparison. No crime was committed here and there was no intent or evidence of a malicious fool-making on my part. I don't believe there was any significant emotional investment by either party.

I don't see where I made fun of her. I described the young woman in literal details. I never said she was trashy or less than a person. Rather, I used an observation of what she was wearing to infer certain things. Trust me, she was advertising the cleavage--we've all seen people do things like this. Seriously, the conversation describing her consisted of only a few sentences.

I still maintain in answer to your challenge and Yeti's question on the Responding #1 post, that I was disingenuous. And I am sorry for that.

As for my hits per month, feel free to check my site meter count.

If you can show me where I pointedly made fun of her, I'll be most happy to reconsider.

Sugarmama--Perfectly understandable. I only clarified that I did not mention it because it continued to re-appear down the thread of comments.

Posted by: Adam at October 20, 2003 03:50 PM

Sugarmama, I have to say that I don't understand where you have gotten the idea that I think that it is specifically the female gender that would fall victim to this kind of Crime. I have seen women "practice", as you say, on guys they never intend to date before. Although it may not be done in exactly the same context, I have seen sorority girls (at the university I attend) mock a guy and then go up to him and talk like they are interested! One guy who went through this happened to be a friend of mine. He is truly what you would call a nice guy, too. Besides, I don't think that the abilities to flirt and resist are the perfect example of the equality of women. These are games that have been popular since earlier times -- the idea that a woman needs to be pursued. I think that if a guy wants to date me, I will date him if I want to date him, if I don't, I don't. Black and white. People who "raise the stakes" and play games like 'hard to get' are confusing to me. And it assumes that women would take the role of being the one who must be captured (not such a equal role if you ask me) I could go into this idea further if you would like. Maybe I am strange, but I just don't get as much of a thrill from it as everybody else seems to do. Rather I get a thrill from exchanging ideas with him, and probably appreciate the same.
As far as your last comment, I think I can get what I want on my own, (without the help of a man), and if Anyone sounds sexist -- its you from that statement for assuming that I have.
Adam: You know what you did. You said that you were hypocritical and that is good enough for me. Oh, and your meter link didn't work (not that it matters -- was just a hypothetical guess) .

Posted by: Catherine at October 20, 2003 07:18 PM

I said disingenuous, actually. I can't figure out how to get the link to work on the site meter, but you can go to the end of the page and click on the icon and that will take you to it.

Posted by: Adam at October 20, 2003 07:30 PM

Oh and I think you were referring to the Yeti, not the Sugarmama's comment.

Posted by: Adam at October 20, 2003 07:31 PM

Catherine should read slower. No one said she was having problems in the man department.

Perhaps she's exceedingly pretty - and likes to "exchange ideas." That's good. Pretty younger women often trade their youth for knowledge and experience. That's the May-December routine all over.

Perhaps she's just no good for flirting. Those people often don't want you to compete because it eliminates them.

Perhap she is just really a nice girl who doesn't understand blogging.

It's telling that she was satisfied with Adam "admitting hypocrisy." Though he did no such thing, her goal was to control him and make him confess his sins.

There's that control again. I'm off to hit on young women and take their numbers and not call them.

Consider it practice.

Posted by: TheYeti at October 20, 2003 08:02 PM

*ZZZZIIIIIIP!*

I'm off to hit on young women and take their numbers and not call them.

Did you hear that ladies of St. Louis? That's the sound of someone donning a Yeti suit.

St. Louis ladies beware.

Posted by: Adam at October 20, 2003 08:22 PM

Hi,
Yes, I didn't mean to offend. Often, I manage to come off too aggressive. Adam sounds pissed. I didn't want that. But I don't think I was trying to control either. I was trying to get a point across, and mixed signals made me think I had. But I guess you didn't really agree as I thought. Yeti, maybe you are right and I should stick to face-to-face. Anyhow, thanks for the online experience. It was fun and you guys made me think.

Posted by: Catherine at October 20, 2003 09:57 PM

So what does all this mean for women who walk up to men and get thier numbers? I had been raised to believe men should be the ones to make the first move. Further, as I got older, I observed that if a man was interested, he'd approach a woman.

Posted by: Queen Goddess at October 21, 2003 09:38 AM

Okay, okay - I do feel a little bad about picking on Catherine.

QG - somehow I don't think you have to worry about having attractive men come up to you.

Posted by: TheYeti at October 21, 2003 10:53 AM