Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Looks & Lulls

Disclaimer: names have been left out to protect the innocent

I was having a conversation with a friend of mine recently. She was asked out on a date by a guy she was not particuarly "into," Or okay- not at ALL into. But the asking out came so out of the blue that this girl did not have time to think things through before she blurted out a "sure, that would be fun," or something along those lines, and regret immediately set in. This friend knew that she was not attracted to the asker-outer, and had about as much in common with the guy as I would with a fishmonger.

The friend is expressing grief to our mutual friend Lana over the situation, as she knows for sure that this guy is not at all her type. "There were all these lulls in the conversation too," she says, "where he just kept standing there, so I kept rambling because I didn't know what else to do!"
"There you go," says Lana matter-of-factly. "Looks and Lulls- those are 2 good reasons to not go out with him."

I thought this was too funny- and too true. One of these hindrances by itself is something one can overcome when initially deciding whether or not to date someone, but the two together are too much. Guess our fishmonger has 2 strikes against him!

10 comments:

Mary Anna said...

I'm gonna go with "names have been left out to protect the not-so innocent..."

No one scrapes the shinkta off the top like Lana. Love her.

Sarah said...

The fact that there is any comparison made to a fishmonger might also be a good indication that she ought not date him...

I'm just sayin.

Anonymous said...

Well, let's playfully add onto "Looks & Lulls"...

Poor fella -- who had the nerve to ask her out -- may only be operating under the "sure, that would be fun" response that he received... So he's maybe a little excited about this...

And I agree with the Looks & Lulls Theory in practice, but actually feel somewhat compelled to qualify that by saying it's just one date. Just one. There doesn't need to be another. But one date? She did say it would be fun... so... just a thought...

Wasn't Survivor Lydia a fishmonger either last season or the one before? I'm getting my reality TV confused...

Sympathetic to the guy,

-E-

Anonymous said...

You know, it's three strikes and your out. Well, I am sure this fellow's third strike is right around the corner. It isn't worth getting his hopes up!
What's shinkta? Should I know what this is?? What does this mean???
LANA

Amanda said...

But what if the guy caught the girl so off guard that she didn't have the nerve to say no to his face?!

Several guys we have asked have told us that the girl should not even go on the one date because

a) she will be miserable the whole time, and

b) the guy will think he did something wrong on the date.

Seriously Eric- weigh in here with your valuable male opinion- if rejection is inevitable for the fishmonger, would he rather get it before the date or after the date?

Mary Anna said...

Lana, don't you read my blog??? If you did, you'd know what Shinkta means...

Maybe I'll explain it to me tonight if you buy me a corndog.

emilyb said...

Yes, Lydia on Survivor was a fishmonger.

Your fellow realityt TV junkie.

Anonymous said...

Ah, Emilyb, thanks for backing up my Lydia thought... good times... the newest Survivor is coming... racially divided --- 4 tribes of 4 different races. Ummm, CBS, it's 2006... welcome...

As to the issue at hand... (sorry, just re-read this and it's way too long, my apologies... )

'Manda, here are my honest thoughts, in no particular order (unless I reorganize them for clarity's sake pre-posting):

1. Sorry your girl was surprised by the ask. But, she said yes... she could have just as easily said that she would be more comfortable on an early date with a group of people (safety squeeze, to use a baseball term) than a one-on-one. But, she said yes... which brings us to #2...

2. Your guy friends that are saying she shouldn't go because "she'd be miserable" and "the guy will think he did something wrong" are WAY wrong. Here's the deal -- she said yes. I would much rather her be a woman of her word than try to squirm out of a date she said yes to. She needs to suck it up and take this one for the sake of "letting her yes be yes". Call it integrity, call it whatever you like. Seriously. She said yes! Now, she deals with the consequences of her oh-so-powerful words. Maybe a good life lesson. :)

Plus (and this in no way affects my opinion), she'll only be miserable if she chooses to be. It's just a few hours... have fun... and at the end of the date, pending the guy's even wanting to ask her out again (which, truth be told, he might - or might not), she can at least acknowledge his character & his up-front-ness, but that she wouldn't be interested in a second date, that she doesn't see the Love Connection happening (or however you women learn how to say it). :)

And heck, if it's a concern that the guy might think he did something wrong, what's he to think if she breaks the date after she said yes without his doing anything?

3. To answer your question, if rejection is inevitable, I'd rather it be from someone who actually went out with me and can speak with "experience" on it than a "she didn't even give me a chance" girl. It's just one date. Maybe he has been working up the courage for a year, maybe he's way too emotionally invested. But I doubt it. If we're going to assume he's going to ask her out again, let's assume she has a pleasant time on the date. As they once said on SNL, "When you assume, it makes an ass out of you and Maya Angelou".

Ok, I just wanted to throw that quote out there for fun's sake... Honestly, this might be a tougher answer -- but I'm on the side of guys Cowboying Up and not complaining about no dates when they aren't asking ... so, that may just be me cheering for the guy in this situation...

... and it may be because recently, I am dealing with rejection-by-her-not-being-available- and-not-returning-phone-calls. Heck, just tell me "no". I can take it. I'm a big boy.

4. And again to emphasize -- she had her chance at "rejection" already... but she said yes... I can't emphasize this point strongly enough... encourage her that she will be a woman of her word, a woman of integrity, if she goes through with the date. In NO WAY is this misleading (in my opinion) -- he's asked for a date, she says yes, they go out. If another ask comes, she has her chance to say "no, but thank you so much".

Just my thoughts. And it's late, and I didn't sleep well last night. So I'm crashing soon, of course to review this, and many other blogs, in the days to come... Good thoughts, all... :)

-E-

Anonymous said...

OK, I completely disagree. Knowing both parties, it is best if the date never takes place. If rejection is inevitable, and it is, because they couldn't even have a five minute conversation, why go and waste both of your time. Why would this guy even ask out a girl to whom he had nothing to say?
I do agree that it is up to her if she will be happy or not on this date, but it will get his hopes up, and he will ask her out again, without a doubt.
Next, he asked if they could 'hangout' sometime. He did not ask if she would like to go on a 'date'. (even though we all know that is what he meant, he did not have the balls to say 'date'). She should just invite him to hang out with friends sometime and make it clear that she is not interested.
Therefore, she will be hanging out with him, and not going back on her 'word'.
The rejection will be easier before the date, or whatever he wants it to be!
LANA

Anonymous said...

Hmmmm... Ok, Lana, let me see...

To answer your question of "why waste both your time", I would say "because she said she would". I don't think the "fun factor" or the "will there be a second date factor" plays into this AT ALL. But... before you cast stones, read on...

I obviously can't jump into the mind of why-he-asked-her-out. Any more than I can jump into the mind of why-is-she-still-going-out-with- that-guy-who-treats-her-like-crap. Whoever those two people are... I made them both up.

Secondly, I stand by my previous advice about the date-and-saying-yes...

BUT... I obviously do not have access to the information you have -- that it wasn't really an "ask-for-date", but the miserable and generic and painful "hangout sometime". My understanding was that the brother brought something much more specific to the table... and absent that, that changes a lot. Because he didn't ask about anything specific, she didn't answer to anything specific. So, the "hangout" option (Section 3, Subsection 12(b), Paragraph 19, Line 71) of the Rules of Dating Etiquette clearly state the freedom one party has to be a generalist & polite when faced with a generalist comment/invite.

So... apart from some young stud pulling said brother aside and walking through the benefits of the Specific Date Ask (instead of the aforementioned "hangout"), he's not gonna learn. Except by watching someone else do it well.

And so, based on new information, I say she does have the freedom to include this guy in a friends-kinda-thing, and not a one-on-one date. Should he ever muster up the courage to be specific in his ask, she needs to be specific in her answer (and if she does, in fact say, "Sure, that would be fun" in a moment of shock, well, I refer you back to my previous entry as to how to handle that, and I stand by all that).

But for now, I'd be agreeable to the friend/group thing. And in that case, yes, the rejection would be easier pre-date (or rather, pre-her-saying-yes-then-backing-out of-it).

See, this would be a whole lot easier if I were in Nashville. Right?

Thanks for the clarification... :)

Happy weekend, everyone...

-E-