Actually, though parking is a pain in North Beach, there's a fairly good parking garage around the corner from Greco where people have parked in the past. Bonus feature: the parking spots have interesting little blurbs in them, like You have a magnetic personality. Only in SF!

Sorry I won't be able to attend... maybe next time!

I forgot to piggyback on SFGirl's original comment in that whopper thread. One, she's absolutely right that for a hetero-male, SF is an excellent dating scene. Two, I've had numerous hetero-male friends who idiotically disagree and maintain that LA is better because "there are more hotter girls." They soon find out that the LA scene may have more hotter girls but the scene is intensely competitive; whereas, if they stayed in SF, and were observant, they would realize that the pecking order is significantly skewed in their favor.

I forgot to piggyback on SFGirl's original comment in that whopper thread. One, she's absolutely right that for a hetero-male, SF is an excellent dating scene. Two, I've had numerous hetero-male friends who idiotically disagree and maintain that LA is better because "there are more hotter girls." They soon find out that the LA scene may have more hotter girls but the scene is intensely competitive; whereas, if they stayed in SF, and were observant, they would realize that the pecking order is significantly skewed in their favor.

you are making me want to move out to SF.

If are better looking than a horse, please stay where you are.

If are better looking than a horse, please stay where you are.

im better lookin than a horse, but i dont really get that statement. are you a guy or grl? are you in san fran or not?

My name is Ludwig and I am a man.

My name is Ludwig and I am a man.

My name is Bill and I’m a head case.

Any plans for a LA meetup?

One, she's absolutely right that for a hetero-male, SF is an excellent dating scene.

didnt someone post a map showing the SF bay area with the largest concentration of single males?

http://creativeclass.typepad.com/thecreativityexchange/2007/04/the_singles_map.html

Is there any chance that the meetup will still be going on at 6 pm ? I cannot make it at 3 pm :-(

A few clarifications... :)

Nametags — I’ll be distributing ‘em and you folks will decorate ‘em with your RealNames and/or Handles ; a nametag in a coffee house isn’t quite the dorkbadge that one would be at an NYC bar.

We haven't done this in a WHILE, partly because there is now a core group of DC-based mutineers (CoffeeFrace, Jay the Weasel/human sacrifice, Sriram, Kenyandesi, Msichana, Mr. Msichana, portmanteau, SJM...) who are regulars, mostly because of what I'm going to discuss below, which negates the need for them...though having colored sharpies around is ALWAYS a good time.

Intros — After badging in, we’ll announce the new folk’s presence and get ‘em to toss up a tidbit or 2 of introductory trivia

I've only done "intro. trivia" once, when we had the infamous battle of the Jessicas (Biel vs. Alba), which was entirely impromptu and spontaneously inspired by comments made by two attendees at the meetup. A few days before lunch at Amma's, those two had gone at it virtually...they ended up across from each other and it was on. And I decided to let everyone get in on the melee. Otherwise, my complicated "Intro" strategy is this: state your name and if you use one, the handle you comment under.

I don't think that's much to ask-- it's plain courtesy, in my opinion, to introduce yourself and to do so in a way that is relevant. If someone says, "Hi, I'm Lenika", people are all..."WTF, mate?". Contrast that with, "Hi, I'm 'Msichana'..." and everyone breaks in to knowing smiles, minor epiphanies etc. When latecomers arrive, I yell at everyone to shut up, then I say, "this is Priya" and Priya looks shy and I say, "and Priya, this is Jay, Jay, Anjali, (and whatever other name is ubiquitous :p )" and by THEN, everyone just continues, re-introducing themselves again, really quickly. It's super helpful for the bears of little brain, like myself, to hear a name twice. Or thrice. By the end of the meetup, we're all making plans to cuddle.

Discussion — Expect some focused discussion of the more fun, recent SM posts including the 1000commentMonster (there were few commentors who had, uh, interesting opinions on the SF scene that I’m hoping to meet). It shouldn’t be anything too intense, just scan the past couple of weeks of posts and hopefully a few will pique your interest enough to be Sepia literate…

Uh, this is the part I'm most worried about-- I have NEVER had a list of topics or any sort of planned meetup merriment. I don't want people to think there is going to be a quiz, or this will be like a book club, where if you haven't read the effing book, you might as well not go. Often, there are more than a few NON-mutineers, who are being dragged along by lurkers who think they'd be a good fit; I'd hate to make these potential cuddle-buddies feel unwelcome.

We have never had to search for conversation, in part because I'm proactive about getting the verbal party started and I make sure everyone gets to chime in and feel included...and if that fails, stand up, look around solemnly and announce, "porn."

Works like a charm, every time. ;)

I'm touched you guys are still meeting at my beloved Greco, even though I won't be there to bliss out with you. It's super easy to move chairs around and linger and because of that, the meetups I've thrown there have been wonderful. Have a Greco grande (or three) for me. Sigh.

Is there any chance that the meetup will still be going on at 6 pm ? I cannot make it at 3 pm :-(

When I throw them, they go for anywhere from four to 15 hours. ;)

When I throw them, they go for anywhere from four to 15 hours. ;)

And then she relaxingly smokes a cigarette post-meet-us.

How about a Chicago meet-up? Assuming that there are plenty of lurkers here who might be interested in attending.

Expect some focused discussion of the more fun, recent SM posts including the 1000commentMonster (there were few commentors who had, uh, interesting opinions on the SF scene that I’m hoping to meet).

Way too much pressure Vinod...I feel so judged :p

Discussion topics are not a bad idea for the reticent. Also, if some are SFAlterna-Desi Hipsters, perhaps we are also a bit socially awkward and could benefit from a bit of guided discussion? ;)

(I tease, but Vinod, I actually think the set up sounds lovely, and I'm sure things will move along organically because that is how we do in the Bay)

I hope everyone has fun and someone drinks a soy au lait on my behalf. ;)

Way too much pressure Vinod...I feel so judged :p

And then she relaxingly smokes a cigarette post-meet-us.

smoking indoors is banned in CA... I guess it flies in nasty indoor-smoking D.C., though :)

Not since Jan 1, 2007 (for the most part) ... no more smoking in DC bars/restaurants.

smoking banned in the entire country of bhutan :)
that is why i love it so.

Hey folks -

Before we get overwhelmed by "homework" for the meetup.... Lemme re-emphasize a few points --

• "It shouldn’t be anything too intense"
• "we’ll just try to have fun"
• "if the structure starts getting oppressive, we’ll quickly abandon it"

We'll try stuff out here and see how it works. If not, we improvise.

smoking indoors is banned in CA... I guess it flies in nasty indoor-smoking D.C., though :)

Not since Jan 1, 2007 (for the most part) ... no more smoking in DC bars/restaurants.

I forgot to piggyback on SFGirl's original comment in that whopper thread. One, she's absolutely right that for a hetero-male, SF is an excellent dating scene.

I've heard this sort of thing number of times, but I've never quite believed it. Granted that I'm a bit shy and maybe a little socially inept, but as a hetero male (tall, not unattractive) who's lived in the Bay Area for 10 years (including 2.5 in SF) I haven't seen it myself. From the hyperbole I've heard at various times one might think that any hetero men in SF would have women jumping them at every opportunity, but it just doesn't work like that. Or maybe I just need to get out more.

I used to come home from clubs/bars reeking of smoke,

This is something I take for granted in SF. When I go to other cities, I become acutely aware of all the smoke/smokers. The most recent time, was in Ft Lauderdale, I went with some friends and we came back after a night out just reeking. One of our friends had stayed back at the hotel to catch up on some work and she was like.. Geez people what have you been doing!! Needless to say 2 am showers for everyone.

As a staunch, liberal-as-they-come San Franciscan, I've always taken pride in the fact that we have the most PhD's per capita, but I'm disheartened by the urban myth that we're largely an unattractive city. (Of course, this is also what I heard about Berkeley girls when I was an undergrad at Cal, and I can definitively assert that this is simply not true.) I actually think San Franciscans are pretty hawt (not counting the Mission hipsters with torn clothes and baaaad haircuts), but I wonder if all that self-hate spurred by the rumor mill means people got no game 'cause they're all insecure (not including myself here, because I've been off the market for years)? *ponder*

Anyone coming from south bay? It would be nice to carpool.

buddhu, despite the great odds for guys, the dating scene in the Bay, in general, sucks. (just my opinion) I think it has a lot more to do with the dating culture of the Bay.

Satya, I think some people see the "casual style" of the Bay as ugly. I actually think there are a lot of attractive people (yes, even at UC Berkeley). I kind of enjoy the crazy eclectic styles you see in the Bay, uggs/miniskirt combo excluded, of course.

Anyone coming from south bay? It would be nice to carpool.

Perhaps. Email me and we'll talk.

buddhu, despite the great odds for guys, the dating scene in the Bay, in general, sucks. (just my opinion) I think it has a lot more to do with the dating culture of the Bay.

And that's for dudes in general.... when you look at the industries clustered in SF (Tech + Finance) you end up with an overflow of DESI DUDES in particular....

buddhu: I have a feeling that if you include the Financial District and SOMA where the demographics are all weird- engineers, commuters- I am probably wrong. Throw those two 'hoods out, and I claim my claim to be true mang.

DJDP: DJDP!

vinod, I'm not challenging your single guy stats :) Are you sure they're all straight? ;)

I'm just saying that Bay dating culture is, in general, way more relaxed and thus sometimes more confusing to navigate than the east coast. I like the straightforwardness I found when in D.C./NYC. If someone wanted to ask me out they did instead of framing things as "hanging out" or as an ambiguous coffee or something. I had a few really awkward experiences where it was clear that the guy thought we were on a date, and I thought we were just grabbing lunch as acquaintances/friends. Maybe this was just college culture, though, not wider Yay Area culture :)

And that's for dudes in general.... when you look at the industries clustered in SF (Tech + Finance) you end up with an overflow of DESI DUDES in particular....

Overflow of Desi Dudes does not equal overwhelming dating prospects. Does not help either when most of them live in Fremont or Sunnyvale! Or maybe I am just socially inept! ;)

clustered in SF

wouldn't it be more accurate to say clustered in the "bay area?" 'cause there ain't no overflow of desi men in the city proper, alas.

buddhu, despite the great odds for guys, the dating scene in the Bay, in general, sucks. (just my opinion) I think it has a lot more to do with the dating culture of the Bay

I dont understand, looking at the map quoted in #10, the bay looks like to be more favored for women.

Overflow of Desi Dudes does not equal overwhelming dating prospects. Does not help either when most of them live in Fremont or Sunnyvale! Or maybe I am just socially inept! ;)

wouldn't it be more accurate to say clustered in the "bay area?" 'cause there ain't no overflow of desi men in the city proper, alas.

The great SF-dating debate returns! Round 3!

We haven't done this in a WHILE, partly because there is now a core group of DC-based mutineers

Meta-clarification: when I said "we" in my earlier comment, I meant we who attend DC meetups. When I put up wrap-up posts, which people in many cities enjoy and find appealing, they discuss DC meetups. I wasn't attempting to use a royal "We" or speak on behalf of the bunker...SM doesn't have hard and fast rules for how to do things. As someone who has hosted more of them than anyone else, I thought I'd provide some "lessons learned" while assuring potential attendees that it really is as chill and fun as the write-ups make them sound, since I was hearing concerns via back channels as well, that this weekend was going to be "different".

Over the past week, I've read comments like, "DC has nametags" and I've mentioned (as a joke, I generally don't imitate Freshman orientation) doing icebreakers so people learn names, etc...over the last few days, a lot of meetup-related dialogue has been based on confusion and less than accurate assumptions. I wanted to set the record straight before SF meets. No pun intended.

In the future, if anyone has concerns, I would hope they would email me directly vs. assuming anything about what I've said or where I'm coming from...well, instead of assuming the worst, period.

jinx, SFGirl! ;)

so the girls are saying SF is mediocre and I'm saying it's great. Sounds like we are agreeing on the reality of situation from opposite preferences.

we are agreeing on the reality of situation

come to think of it, i barely know any single women OR men in SF. i need to get the hell out of dodge.

If the concensus is, "yeah there are lots of guys but they all suck" then sure that might make SF a bad dating place, but relatively speaking to a place with a plurality of women, it's still better. Unless you claim that women in SF don't mind going lesbo.

Or maybe I am just socially inept! ;)

I don't think the guys in SF suck. I think a lot are gay, some move in different social circles, and SF is just generally a sucky city for singles (I swear to god there are polls to that effect)

at least before lumping all SF dudes as "undateable" ;-)

I never said they were undateable, I just said they just were missing from SF.. but then again the socially inept thing is always possible ;)

so the girls are saying SF is mediocre and I'm saying it's great. Sounds like we are agreeing on the reality of situation from opposite preferences.

and SF is just generally a sucky city for singles

Not that Im doubting your statement, but how many people do you know living in big cities say, "wow this city is great for dating" regardless what tha ratio of single men:single women is.

ahh.. but some (many? most?) SF dudes who live here say it sucks because of the numbers. Particularly the desi dudes who complain that's it such a "desi woman's market" out here..... ;-)

Square 1 anyone? Maybe the desi women here are not the desi men's type and vice versa.. (what the hell, I thought I'd throw that possibility in there too!)

As a woman, I think SF is awesome! I met the love of my life here, so for that reason alone, it rocks way more than Berkeley, 'cause I never got laid as a college student.

Now, maybe this is a California thing in general, but I have found that men and women alike tend to be flakey here and think nothing of canceling a date last minute. Now that we've ruled out ugliness, perhaps it's just the noncommittal attitudes that make dating hard?

I don't meet a lot of desi men in SF unless they're gay or the stuffed-shirt software engineer type. Gay men love me, but the latter camp tend to fall in the lissome, straight-haired, I-banker girls. :)

I don't meet a lot of desi men in SF unless they're gay or the stuffed-shirt software engineer type

is SF that gay that even the software engineers stuff their shirts?

On the serious tip, two points.

1. Erase the need for us to pay for sh*t, you'll find no more software engineers I guarantee it.
2. didn't you say you were getting married? why are you ruminating about who falls for who any more? (not being combative, just curious)

And we are back to La Perla girls :) I have NEVER heard a desi woman say that SF is a great place for desi-on-desi dating.

HMF, I've heard positive reviews of being single in other cities, for sure, and as a singleton have had a much more fun time being single in cities besides SF. Not that I don't love SF, I do. I just don't love it for dating.

How about shortlist some of the oddities of SF to put some of the hurdles in perspective:

-it's a big little city (population of only 744,000)

-by virtue of its size, it has a big commuter population

-it's the Wall Street of the West and the urban hub of Silicon Valley (males per 100 females)

-large gay population

...what else? I think the size of the city magnifies the factors that deviate from the norm (whether you are comparing SF to NYC or SF to California)

Not that Im doubting your statement, but how many people do you know living in big cities say, "wow this city is great for dating" regardless what tha ratio of single men:single women is.

You hit the nail on the head -- I've been wanting to say this ever since this discussion started. Never have I heard people say about a city "this is a great city for meeting guys" (or girls, but guys usually don't complain about these things as much). Bottom line is that meeting someone you click with is hard, but rather than accept that reality, it is easier for people to say "this is a horrible city for meeting people."

NVM,

dating culture! dating culture!

Ok I'll stop now :)

1. Erase the need for us to pay for sh*t, you'll find no more software engineers I guarantee it.

And this applies to me how?

2. didn't you say you were getting married? why are you ruminating about who falls for who any more? (not being combative, just curious)

Ah, because now that I'm hitched, other people's amours are cause for vicarious drama, of course!

"this is a great city for meeting guys"

My friend in LA says that :p He moved from Davis to LA and he looves it there (from a dating perspective) :p

And this applies to me how?

See your response to pt #2. Go forth and teach your female underlings.

SF Girl, my best gay friend is thinking of moving out of SF because he feels exactly the opposite. The gay guys here, according to him, are too bitchy, cliquey, and looks-conscious. He always meets men but nothing lasts longer than a week or two. According to him, gay men in Atlanta are more sincere and less player-ish. It's that southern gentleman thing, I suppose.

"this is a great city for meeting guys"

My friend in LA says that :p He moved from Davis to LA and he looves it there (from a dating perspective) :p

I meant the other way round... "he says its a great city for meeting women" :D

SF is better than LA for gay guys, imo. It's hard, though, b/c of the levels of racism in both SF/LA for desi queer guys, but also b/c of the voracious promiscuity.

and SF is just generally a sucky city for singles (I swear to god there are polls to that effect)

Camille there are polls to that effect. Specifically I remember hearing on the radio that in a survey of singles in major cities, SF singles rated in the hardest place to meet people.
I'm not surprised. In my time living in the city, when you go out to bars, people are very much in their own groups and not willing to mingle. On a side note, I was lucky enough to meet in person Mr. Vinod in a friend-of-friend-of-friend way and he is super nice and a good mingler, bummed I'm not making the meetup :D

Secondly, as someone mentioned before, most of the desi men are in the penninsula or south bay. And for a bridge-and-tunnel girl like me, they are geographically undesireable. The desi men you do see in the FiDi are commuters, like me, and most of them are married software duhwelopers.

Frankly Indian parties are not my thing. I don't need to be in a room full or tight-shirted-goateed-crown-and-coke drinking asshats, because theses are the type of guys those parties attract.

Ok, rant done!

my best gay friend

How do the modifiers work here? of all your gay friends, he's the best? or of all your friends, is he the best at being gay?

It's that southern gentleman thing, I suppose.

haha. reminds me of the chapelle skit, how would a gay KKK member act?

"Umm. yah hi, umm, we want you to like leave our town cuz being white is just fabulous and youre soo not"

HMF, in remembrance of that other post, mebbe SF sucks for dating because the men are so cheap! ;)

I just want to clarify that I am not saying that men here are BAD or UNDESIRABLE or UNDATEABLE (I have great single male friends, well most are not single anymore). I am just saying, I dont have a clue where to meet em. Maybe I do stay in my group when I go out and dont seem open (socially inept anyone?)

Please don't throw tomatoes at me at the meetup :o

Bottom line is that meeting someone you click with is hard, but rather than accept that reality, it is easier for people to say "this is a horrible city for meeting people."

Bingo.

DJDP: DJDP!

NVM: NVM!

HMF, in remembrance of that other post, mebbe SF sucks for dating because the men are so cheap

If there's any place where guys are cheap (and justifiably so) it's NYC.

Did y'all ever hear the one about the male bonobo's that escaped the San Francisco zoo? They all got dates!

I kill me!

Did y'all ever hear the one about the male bonobo's that escaped the San Francisco zoo? They all got dates!

Yeah, with men.

Besides being humans closest animal relative or some crap like that (vague memory from the one anthro class I took in college), they are know for being extremely sexual and engaging in homosexual couplings.

How do the modifiers work here? of all your gay friends, he's the best? or of all your friends, is he the best at being gay?

All of the above. Really. He's also incorrigible when it comes to trumpeting his preference for white guys, so SF may be a bit too motley for him, I'm afraid. I was being sarcastic about the southern gentleman thing, though it's partially true; my fiance is one of those rare specimens.

If there's any place where guys are cheap (and justifiably so) it's NYC.

Staying in and canoodling is more fun, anyhow.

I just want to clarify that I am not saying that men here are BAD or UNDESIRABLE or UNDATEABLE (I have great single male friends, well most are not single anymore). I am just saying, I dont have a clue where to meet em.

SF Girl, the whole enterprise of "meeting" men is quite onerous. Bars usually render poor-quality dates, and our social circles tend to be claustrophobic and romantically stultifying. I think the best way to do it--kind of a cliche--is to simply try to get out more, i.e., take classes, do community service, get involved with projects you love and are passionate about. By multiplying the number of people you meet, you multiply your opportunities astronomically. It takes motivation, but it works every time, I hear. Even in places like SF. :)

And if all else fails, you can always try Craigslist. It's easy to judge a person by the quality of their cock pics, no? ;)

funny, i could never make it to any of the NY meetups but now i find myself coming to SF for one...!

You hit the nail on the head -- I've been wanting to say this ever since this discussion started. Never have I heard people say about a city "this is a great city for meeting guys" (or girls, but guys usually don't complain about these things as much). Bottom line is that meeting someone you click with is hard, but rather than accept that reality, it is easier for people to say "this is a horrible city for meeting people."

I know this is a general remark and not directed at me (sorry if I stirred up a sore topic, but looks like there's no need to worry about discussion topics for the meetup), but just wanted to point out that I was simply expressing doubt about the sentiments which are at the other end of the spectrum: i.e. that it's so absurdly easy for hetero men to meet women in SF that the absence of a bevy of beautiful babely admirers must indicate some major shortcomings. In my experience dating has been more difficult in my 10 years in the Bay Area (including SF) than in the DC area where I'm originally from.

Actually, I find meeting new people in general difficult in the Bay Area. There's the über-casual factor mentioned before, where you you're not even sure where you rate in terms of importance to someone relative to a cup of coffee they had three days ago. Then there's the tendency for people to stick to tightly-knit groups of friends when they're out socializing, leaving one to wonder how they got into those groups in the first place. Again, I'm perfectly aware of my less than average social abilities, but somehow things just seemed easier back on the East Coast.

buddhu,
DC is a particularly friendly place, where it's unusually easy to meet people for a big metropolitan area in the USA. Just pick a (major) political party and you have 1/2 a million new friends.

In my time living in the city, when you go out to bars, people are very much in their own groups and not willing to mingle.

Yes, exactly! Glad it's not just me.

We stand corrected? According to Forbes, "San Francisco-Oakland" is the number one city for singles.

We stand corrected? According to Forbes, "San Francisco-Oakland" is the number one city for singles.

But check out their methodology:

I don't think SF is an affordable place to live if you are single.

How many women will deny that in every large city, a segment of the female population will doll themselves up, go out, get hit on/approached by 10-20 guys, reject them all, then come home and complain that "dating in this city is so hard"?

We stand corrected? According to Forbes, "San Francisco-Oakland" is the number one city for singles.

And according to them NYC is #2 so...what does that tell us? That the issue is with us and not with the cities!

damn got a wedding to go to. tell me there will be another?
sadness.

But check out their methodology:

Ha! They list "pro sports teams" under "culture".

I don't think SF is an affordable place to live if you are single.

Hale no!

but neither is nyc

but neither is nyc

My point exactly. Their methodology is flawed.
And they didn't really poll people on the dating scene. It is mainly based on the number of singles. Hence they are actually supporting my argument it's hard out there to find someone because all these people are single. SF has the most singles.
Also, they based their methodology on the number on singles online. Hello, people are online because they aren't meeting people face-to-face, because again it's hard out there for a pimp.

I'm just sayin'...

damn got a wedding to go to. tell me there will be another? sadness

Ditto. Perhaps we should conduct a highly informal mutineer study of how approachable people are at weddings? Mine is not is the Bay Area though, it's in Dallas. So fellow Mutineers enjoy the meetup while I'm sweltering in heat under my 9-yards of GoodIndianGirl sari.

BIG out!

#8 wondering that too? guess if no bloggers in LA or any locale someone else would have to pick up the slack. perhaps we should start? I'm in central OC. U?

This meetup sounds pretty interesting, since I will be visiting SF for the first time. Anyone know of any good restaurants, clubs, sites to visit. It would help immensely since I have never been on the west coast.

We stand corrected? According to Forbes, "San Francisco-Oakland" is the number one city for singles.

HMF, I think your metric is ridiculous, and here's why: just because someone hits on you does not mean they are dateable. What if they're total tweakers? What if they're completely inappropriate? What if they say something terribly offensive? I have a whole barrage of "oh my god I am traumatized from how X hit on me" stories.

Satya, on classes: "Mr. Right Does Not Take Classes"

Katie, what kinds of things do you like? SF has a lot of things for every personality type (in my opinion), so it helps to know what you're interested in (e.g. museums, sightseeing, public concerts, shopping, cultural activities, parks).

Hey Camille--I never suggested that meeting people in classes is tantamount to meeting Mr. Right. It's more that increasing the general pool of people you interact with (since I'm in agreement that people tend to coagulate in their incestuous social circles, without nary a thought about the "outside" world, so it's best to take a one-on-one approach) leads to more opportunities to interact with potentially interesting people. I'm a board member of a prominent Asian American arts organization in San Francisco, and I've actually met (and hooked some of my single friends up with!) a plethora of dateable, progressive, community-oriented hawties through the work I do. Fo' reals.

HMF, I think your metric is ridiculous, and here's why: just because someone hits on you does not mean they are dateable. What if they're total tweakers? What if they're completely inappropriate? What if they say something terribly offensive? I have a whole barrage of "oh my god I am traumatized from how X hit on me" stories.

Preach it, girl. Quantity does not quality make. A lot of my female friends who quit the bar scene eons ago were more accustomed to meeting slimy, drunken Lotharios who wanted to bag them more than "date" them. I don't think it's necessarily because eligible suitors don't populate bars and nightclubs; it's just that it's more difficult to form an estimable opinion about someone in an environment that's so addled by distractions (noise, alcohol, etc.). And from my experience, it's the drunken Lotharios who seem to have all the chutzpah. :)

BadIndianGirl, are you the same chick with the website (I vaguely recall an article on how to prevent auntie thighs)? Wondering.

HMF, I think your metric is ridiculous, and here's why: just because someone hits on you does not mean they are dateable. What if they're total tweakers? What if they're completely inappropriate? What if they say something terribly offensive? I have a whole barrage of "oh my god I am traumatized from how X hit on me" stories.

I agree with you in principle, but let's break it down:

Take say an average-looking 24 year old female living in a mid sized to big city, and perform an analysis over a single year. Let's also be conservative, considering fri and sat "party" nights, we have 52*2 = 104 nights, lets say she only goes out 60% of them (which is pretty conservative if you ask me), so .60 * 104 = 60 times going out per year, now on average, lets say 10 approaches per night (let me know if this is too much?)

so we have 600 approaches in a year. You're telling me one who rejects that many is being honest with herself by saying, "it's so hard dating in this city"?

Honestly, I find the female vetting process for potential suitors much like a major studio's vetting process for new films. They go though such a hurrendous screening process, rejecting all kinds of scripts.. but still manage to put out sh*tty movies!

it's just that it's more difficult to form an estimable opinion about someone in an environment that's so addled by distractions (noise, alcohol, etc.). And from my experience, it's the drunken Lotharios who seem to have all the chutzpah.

Well, the lotharios acquire that title by measure of how many they've "lotharios'ed" and since that "lothariosing" is done voluntarily with no coercion, you've answered your own question. If you want quality, then change the criteria by which you evaluate (you call it 'chutspah').

If you want quality, then change the criteria by which you evaluate (you call it 'chutspah').

Unless you agree that criteria is hardwired.

Satya, I didn't mean to imply that you were arguing Mr. Right was in a class. Just wanted to let folks know that according to the NYT, trying to make yourself a better person (with the hopes of meeting someone also) may work better if you focus on criteria 1, not criteria 2 :) I think you're totally right on when it comes to "super tight incestuous SF social circles." I think it's just hard to meet people in SF, but there are tons of great people. But you're right, it's a matter of getting out of one's element as well, which, in an awesome city like SF, is more doable than not. Just takes a little extra legwork :)

Also, Satya, I hope you come to the SF meetup so you can hook up all these mutinous alterna-desi girls with the single hawties you mentioned ;)

A lot of my female friends who quit the bar scene eons ago were more accustomed to meeting slimy, drunken Lotharios who wanted to bag them more than "date" them.

And, to be honest, I'm not really looking to pick up someone dateable in a bar. Maybe this is my personal bias, but if someone is sloppy drunk, slobbering (which I absolutely mean in a literal sense), or crazy hopped up and uses openers such as: "I had an ex-girlfriend named Camille once... she was crazy... I think she's in jail now... But I think you should save my life and marry me, and we can go fuck right now." NOT DO-ABLE, let alone dateable! HMF, when you get sleazy guys hitting on you all the time, it makes it less fun to go out, particularly to bars [which is a bummer, b/c I do like detoxing with my friends or going dancing]. It also makes it harder for all those decent, upstanding guys out there because a girl's guard is totally going to be heightened.

By extension, I'm much more likely to be amenable to meeting someone at some place cultural/arts-y, or at an event, than at a bar/club. So maybe the trick is to be in places where you're going to meet folks with similar interests, but not so similar that you end up in the same social circle of incestuousness.

HMF, when you get sleazy guys hitting on you all the time,

But according to Satya's argument, it's the drunken lotharios that have all the success (or else they wouldn't be lotharios).

it makes it less fun to go out, particularly to bars [which is a bummer, b/c I do like detoxing with my friends or going dancing].

This is doubtful. So you're saying, lets say there was an establishment that only allowed women, served alcohol and played music so you could detox and dance without the fear of any "sleazy guys" approaching you, these would sell out? hogwash.

It also makes it harder for all those decent, upstanding guys out there because a girl's guard is totally going to be heightened.

Yes it does, because we see no incentive for staying decent and upstanding. The criteria must change.

wedding venue shopping got canceled on sunday so i may actually be able to make this...

HMF, whatevs. I know you're already committed to the "men are the victims of society in all ways, especially dating" camp. Yes, I've been to female-only bars/events/clubs (lesbian and mixed orientation), and I do enjoy myself substantially more when compared to some of the evenings when I'm at a co-ed bar having really awful guys ruining my time with their sleaze. Just because this isn't the scene where you live or among your social circle doesn't mean that my experience doesn't exist among women in my social circle in the Bay Area. And creepy guys DO make it less fun to go out. I almost wish I could capture the awful sinking feeling I get in my gut when someone won't leave me alone, bottle it, and send it to you so you could feel a fraction of the annoyance and disappointment I feel when a usually "safe" place to hang out suddenly becomes affiliated with a jerk face. Just like this article describes, there's a time, place, and manner in which it is ok to hit on someone without ruining their time.

of the evenings when I'm at a co-ed bar having really awful guys ruining my time with their sleaze. Just because this isn't the scene where you live or among your social circle doesn't mean that my experience doesn't exist among women in my social circle in the Bay Area. And creepy guys DO make it less fun to go out. I almost wish I could capture the awful sinking feeling I get in my gut when someone won't leave me alone, bottle it, and send it to you so you could feel a fraction of the annoyance and disappointment I feel when a usually "safe" place to hang out suddenly becomes affiliated with a jerk face. Just like this article describes, there's a time, place, and manner in which it is ok to hit on someone without ruining their time.

not only do you get to sit back and reject/accept a large number of applicants, you get to complain about not having discretion on when they show up. boo-hoo.

not only do you get to sit back and reject/accept a large number of applicants, you get to complain about not having discretion on when they show up. boo-hoo.

q: what's the diff between a sleazy pick up line from a creepy guy and a confident, fun, flirtatious opening gambit?

a: how tall is the dude?

not only do you get to sit back and reject/accept a large number of applicants, you get to complain about not having discretion on when they show up. boo-hoo.

HMF, whatevs. I know you're already committed to the "men are the victims of society in all ways, especially dating" camp.

This is a total exaggeration, I believe men and women are human beings and should be treated equally. Every one of my stances comes from this belief. And Yes I do believe in dating there are certain privileges afforded to women, but that's actually not even relevant here.

Yes, I've been to female-only bars/events/clubs (lesbian and mixed orientation), and I do enjoy myself substantially more when compared to some of the evenings when I'm at a co-ed bar having really awful guys ruining my time with their sleaze.

Events are different, and lesbo stuff doesn't count, because all the hitting on would happen there. I think you kinda missed my point, there would never be an establishment "just for people to detox and dance" because no one would ever patronize them, no matter how much they say that's all they want to do.

Besides, you mean there are no sleazy lesbos out there?

Just because this isn't the scene where you live or among your social circle doesn't mean that my experience doesn't exist among women in my social circle in the Bay Area. And creepy guys DO make it less fun to go out.

I don't doubt they do, however two points:

1. usually, creepy = not good looking
2. Related to pt1, when a woman says, "I just wanna dance with my friends and detox" (techincaly, by ingesting alcohol, aren't you 'toxing'?) it usualy doesn't mean, "I wanna be in a place where no guys are", it means "I only want good looking men that pass my filters to talk to me" It's having the cake and eating it too.

not only do you get to sit back and reject/accept a large number of applicants, you get to complain about not having discretion on when they show up. boo-hoo.

but i don't understand why certain men should even be considered in the first place. sometimes, it is specific to the guy - i.e. the pick-up line, or comments that he makes (one guy was trying to impress me with his ivy league wallpaper on his mobile - wtf?) or the entitlement attitude - e.g. i never say no in a rude way, but a total stranger demanding an explanation as to why i don't want to go out with him is just not cool. but other times, it's just about the mood that night - i want to have an uncomplicated evening with my friends without thinking about men in a romantic way - that's my prerogative. on such nights, i have been known to have proper conversations with men, but end the night/conversation without asking for a number or making any remotely romantic suggestion - yet many men consider this a tease. it's this atttude that i shouldn't be free to express my own will - that somehow i should attempt something more than i want to, just because he wants to - that irks me.

HMF, I understand where you're coming from (and I didn't mean to hyperbolize your POV), and please refer to #95 for clarity on how I am using the term "creepy." Surprisingly, I'm not as shallow as I sound. Also, there are sleazy lesbians, you're right -- I was just trying to think of moments when I'd been in non-coed social settings and whether or not that somehow effected my enjoyment level. I'm sure such establishments would not be able to stay above-ground, but I don't think that the idea, in small amounts, is so off-base.

Also, I don't really drink, so I'm not often "toxing" -- I'm usually unwinding from a stressful day/week with people who I love and who love me. If I cannot relax at my favorite watering hole, then unfortunately my circle of options starts to narrow. I'm not averse to talking to or meeting new people when I go out with friends, regardless of whether or not I'm attracted to them. In general I would consider myself to be relatively extroverted, social, friendly, and open. I am, however, averse to talking to or meeting people who are hugely inappropriate, who make me feel highly uncomfortable, or who are so far gone that it becomes difficult to keep up any attempt at dialogue.

ak, right on :)

I'm talking about men who are so far on the outside of what is appropriate conversation that it's vulgar.

Examples? If you only make the creepy or not decision after he opens his mouth thats different, most of my female friends usually make it upon sight. And then try and wiggle their way out of it when I say they're making a looks based decision.

HMF, now I'm beginning to understand why you said people don't like you. ;) But maybe you're handsome and scintillating in person, so that makes up for your bellicose posture?

About the drunken Lotharios. Let's put it this way--it's all a matter of numbers, right? Let's say said drunken Lothario hits on, perhaps, 90 women in one night. Because he's a creepazoid, 90 percent of those women will reject him. But the other 10 percent, for whatever reason, will be flattered, genuinely attracted to him, or too drunk to exercise judgment. So in one night, he's managed to nab himself ten phone numbers. Way to go! What a playa! Man's got some serious game!

NOT.

Again, quality over quantity. Just because he gets women by being a dick, doesn't mean he's "successful" with women.

HMF, I usually make the creepy decision after someone opens his mouth [the only exception to this being if someone does something physical -- e.g. groping, or if someone is visibly much older and is leering at me].

I think the most common "creepy" examples, for me at least, are men who open with the line "Hey gorgeous/beautiful..." and then move into really X-rated descriptions of what they'd like to do (physically) with me, which I find both over-forward, offensive, and tasteless. I also have the anecdote above -- i.e. the guy who said his ex was named Camille, followed it up by asking me if I wanted to get married, and if not married, if I just wanted to go home with him (but phrased in a more vulgar way and said while totally totally sloshed). I was also told once -- as a pick-up line -- that I was drinking a "ghetto drink" and was then asked if that meant I was nasty in bed. By the way, these were all opening lines.. they weren't follow up lines to some kind of pre-existing conversation, or something said after talking for a while. They were all comments put out there at the very beginning. And when I've been firm but polite about leaving a conversation or not being interested, these kinds of guys rarely take no for an answer. They're persistent, or they'll follow me around the bar, or they'll be really rude to my friends (if my friends are trying to "shield" me), or they'll tell me what a frigid, conservative, up-tight bitch I am. Just all sorts of crazy shit. Those are the experiences I'm talking about that make me less likely to want to return to a place, especially if the person who does it is a regular at said bar/club.

Oh, and expanding on Satya's example, I also meet a lot of those "lotharios" who target very drunk women who are clearly not ok to go home with someone, insinuate themselves into her company, pick fights with her friends, and then try to take her inebriated-self home. They may be "getting some," but to me it's not very different from date-rape.

HMF, now I'm beginning to understand why you said people don't like you.

When did I say this? And why the &#$@ do you care if I'm handsome or not? aren't you getting married for chrissakes?

About the drunken Lotharios. Let's put it this way--it's all a matter of numbers, right? Let's say said drunken Lothario hits on, perhaps, 90 women in one night. Because he's a creepazoid, 90 percent of those women will reject him.

Ok, so you're saying it's the 10% of women that do accept him that are to blame ? Then in order for that behavior to stop, those 10% need to change their criteria. Because it doesn't provide incentive for the 'creepazoid' to change, also you're assuming that him being a non-creepazoid/lotharios would increase that 90% rejection rate, which I seriously and ridiculously question.

HMF, if women want to make a purely looks-based decision, that's their prerogative. I'm sure that the men doing the approaching have their eye on women they think are attractive, right? So, if that's the case, the woman who's being approached also gets to make a congruous decision on whether he's attractive.

Interesting to me that so many men (many of whom aren't even attractive) think it's their birthright to go out with hawt girls, but it's indefensible for a woman to do the same.

They may be "getting some," but to me it's not very different from date-rape

If you read my earlier comment, #87, you'll see I assumed no coercion, I'm assuming the woman is making a clear, lucid, conscious decision. However, if you call someone a lotharios, cassanova, don juan, what have you, it usually assumes they are successful, surely more than 10% of the time.

The same way if you call someone a great 3 point shot player, it assumes they can make most of their 3 point shots.

camille, thanks :)

i will add one non-verbal, but physical incidence of sleaziness - i was at a club in nyc, and a guy asks me to dance. he's a good dancer, we're having fun when all of a sudden he picks me up by my thighs, pushes me up against a wall, starts dry humping me, and then takes my hand and puts it on his penis and tells me, 'feel how hard i am for you, baby.' this isn't even sleaziness - it was basically assault. the worst part was that i had to have strangers get him off of me (when my own attempts to push him off failed), while my friends did nothing because they thought that i was 'cool' with it. i don't think camille, and others, are exaggerating - there is some seriously fucked-up things that you are exposed to in the 'singles' scene.

I'm sure that the men doing the approaching have their eye on women they think are attractive, right? So, if that's the case, the woman who's being approached also gets to make a congruous decision on whether he's attractive.

Perhaps, then, it was a misuse of the term "lothario." The impression I get is that the intent was to make it sound sinister and overly-slick, not necessarily "oozing charm" or anything to that effect.

HMF, if women want to make a purely looks-based decision, that's their prerogative.

it most certainly is. Just stop using vague terms like 'creepy' to try and appear "not as superficial"

this isn't even sleaziness - it was basically assault.

It isn't 'basically' assault. it is. I don't categorize this is lotharios behavior, this is criminal behavior.

Ugh, ak that is awful. I had something happen -- minus the being lifted (but with the being pinned to the wall), and have also had someone grab me from behind, grind against me, and not let go, despite struggling to get away.

HMF, I think -- based on the MANY relationship/dating convos we've all had on SM now -- that most of the women who've been commenting here have been clear that they are using "creepy" in a very appropriate way. When it comes to attractiveness, I'm nice to everyone even if I'm not interested because I think it is awful to make someone who's been brave enough to approach you feel like crap. This is certainly more than what most guys do for me (I make no claims at being hot -- I am a solidly average-looking girl with a good number of above-average cutie patootie girlfriends).

HMF, yes, i should have left out the 'basically.' i wasn't commenting specifically on the lothario incidents - more on examples of how rejection is justified in some cases. dance floors can be particularly terrifying places - even on a lower level - the attempts to grind/grope from behind still continue to this day - if the same guy actually asked me straight out if wanted to dance, i'd probably say yes, except that his slezy back-handed way is a total turn-off.

considering fri and sat "party" nights, we have 52*2 = 104 nights, lets say she only goes out 60% of them (which is pretty conservative if you ask me), so .60 * 104 = 60 times going out per year, now on average, lets say 10 approaches per night (let me know if this is too much?)

This math does not work for me. Maybe I don't go to bars as much. And to Camille and Satya's point, I think I am the kind of person who stays with the "clique"/group when I do go out. So I am going to take the onus too. Ah SM is making in introspective...

When did I say this? And why the &#$@ do you care if I'm handsome or not? aren't you getting married for chrissakes

On Anna's blog, you were dubious about my liking you; as you said, you were accustomed to catching heat on the SM blog. I must have glossed over your prior posts. But now I see what you mean. Um, and I don't care what you look like or whether you're a great conversationalist--I was making a joke, but that's neither here nor there. And sorry--I didn't realize that not being single automatically abrogated my right to offer commentary.

Ok, so you're saying it's the 10% of women that do accept him that are to blame ? Then in order for that behavior to stop, those 10% need to change their criteria.

You seem overly fond of assigning "blame." I think that what people do is their own business. Assholes get p***y all the time. Yeah, maybe that means the women they're dating aren't all that great at exercising judgment, but it's unfair to say the onus is on them to smack the guy into shape and stop him from being an asshole to other women. After all, it seems to me that it should be the other way around: if majority opinion determines our incentives, the fact that 90% of women find him loathsome should be incentive enough to make him change.

But isn't it common knowledge that men/women + alcohol + bar = obnoxiousness (more so from men)? Even if someone is unaware, then any woman who goes to bars will have personal incontrovertible proof of it by her 10th visit. Maybe those women are looking to hook-up with lotharios (nothing wrong with that), as long as they pass their criteria (again, nothing wrong with that- we all have standards). But to continue frequenting bars and then criticize obnoxious behavior of drunken men => Einstein quote on insanity, IMO. As far as I know, there isn't a social movement afoot to change the way some men behave at bars.

Not to get stuck on semantics, but there are a variety of definitions and gradations of meaning when it comes to "lothario" and, of course, other words. I meant:

Lo·thar·i·o /loʊˈθɛəriˌoʊ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[loh-thair-ee-oh] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -thar·i·os.
(sometimes lowercase) a man who obsessively seduces and deceives women

There's also:

lothario

noun
a man who behaves selfishly in his sexual relationships with women

But that's for another blog post. :)

And sorry--I didn't realize that not being single automatically abrogated my right to offer commentary.

It doesn't... but it's still confusing as hell why you offer it.?

After all, it seems to me that it should be the other way around: if majority opinion determines our incentives, the fact that 90% of women find him loathsome should be incentive enough to make him change.

I assign blame when and where it's appropriate. And no, infact you are completely wrong on this point.

Look at spam mail, most of it gets sent to spam filters or ignored and deleted instantly, but from the spammers point of view, it "works" because a small percent do follow up on :

phone deals, penis enlargement, viagra deals, etc.. etc..

So sure, maybe in some ideal utopia, the spammers should out of the generosity to not bother 90% of the population should stop, but they won't because it's worth it to nail that 10% that will respond positively. So the only way to really stop them is to make the people who respond, to stop doing so. Make it cost more to send the spam (or in this case, act 'creepily')

I am a solidly average-looking girl with a good number of above-average cutie patootie girlfriends).

Amit, there's a difference between a guy being drunk and therefore stupid/obnoxious vs. being drunk and therefore somehow justified in being completely socially inappropriate. You're right, it's not fair to expect people to be 100% when they're in a bar, but I do think it's fair to want to go out without having someone sexually assault you or harass you all evening long.

Puli, my friends aren't i-bankers and most are taken :) The ones in NYC are mostly students right now.

I make no claims at being hot -- I am a solidly average-looking girl with a good number of above-average cutie patootie girlfriends

But isn't it common knowledge that men/women + alcohol + bar = obnoxiousness (more so from men)? Even if someone is unaware, then any woman who goes to bars will have personal incontrovertible proof of it by her 10th visit.

That's why I don't go to bars and clubs anymore. :) But seriously, not all men and women behave like sex-crazed nitwits. I understand that alcohol sometimes impairs people's judgments, but we can't use it as an excuse to cross boundaries.

And I'm fine with the Lotharios, personally, as long as they can respect personal space and take their game elsewhere when they realize homegirl ain't interested.

HMF, if women want to make a purely looks-based decision, that's their prerogative.

it most certainly is. Just stop using vague terms like 'creepy' to try and appear "not as superficial"

HMF, are you sure this isn't a matter of the guy being both unattractive and creepy? I haven't experienced a lot of women using the term "creepy" unless the man makes her feel justifiably uncomfortable (and not just cuz he's got a schnoz like Cyrano de Bergerac).

Puli, my friends aren't i-bankers and most are taken :) The ones in NYC are mostly students right now.

i was kidding with the i bankers spiel. that was based on someone saying "these girls like i bankers" and me thinking "hmm...maybe there is a market for me there". then everyone going *llah hu @khbar on my @ss.

most are taken

lame. pretty grls get taken fast.

The ones in NYC are mostly students right now.

nuttin arong with getting an education.

HMF, I offer my commentary because I have many male and female friends who are perfectly normal and wonderful and lovely but who have been beaten black and blue by the battering ram of "dating." I laugh, cry, and commiserate with them over this, so the subject is--at least marginally--relevant to me.

But perhaps you're right--if I have nothing of import to say, I should desist altogether.

I haven't experienced a lot of women using the term "creepy" unless the man makes her feel justifiably uncomfortable

My contention is the behavior (obviously not in extreme cases like the ones mentioned above) is deemed creepy in conjunction with the looks. I believe the terms aren't linearly separable when used in the context of dating, etc.. I know women who, upon just having certain guys look in their direction and smile will say, "he's creepy"

Ask yourself this, but honestly. How many of these 'creepy' guys were good looking?

This point really can't be debated in general. If you want to see how much more racist, heightest, fattist, educationist and classist women are than men compare personal ad requirements. But how bad is it really for any commentator here? All the guys are obviously smart and witty. Being 6'2" will get you in the door, but being witty will get you through the doggy door. ;)

but I do think it's fair to want to go out without having someone sexually assault you or harass you all evening long.

You're talking criminal activity here (sexual assault) which is different from drunken obnoxiousness.

Thinking of putting in an appearance, but all this bad press about software-wallahs is giving me pause for thought. 8-)-o>

But perhaps you're right--if I have nothing of import to say, I should desist altogether.

I never said that, neither did I make any claim on it's import. I just said it's a bit confusing for someone who's theoretically should be 'removed' from all the analysis of male/female dating intricacies to offer commentary in the present tense, it just gives off the vibe that you have a personal vested interest somehow. Just a bit confusing thats all.

nuttin arong with getting an education.

Is that what the i-bankers are calling it these days? ;)

Is that what the i-bankers are calling it these days? ;)

but it's unfair to say the onus is on them to smack the guy into shape and stop him from being an asshole to other women.

I missed this earlier, and this is absolutely not what Im saying. I'm saying the onus is on these 10% to *stop being* the 10%, then the guy will find his behavior doesn't yield positive results (even if only 10%) and change it himself (because it will no longer work)

All the guys are obviously smart and witty. Being 6'2" will get you in the door, but being witty will get you through the doggy door

Oh man witty trumps 6'2 ALWAYS! I know a 5'5 boy who is soo witty/funny, that I would take him over any 6'0 any day (too bad he is already taken)

I missed this earlier, and this is absolutely not what Im saying. I'm saying the onus is on these 10% to *stop being* the 10%, then the guy will find his behavior doesn't yield positive results (even if only 10%) and change it himself (because it will no longer work)

perhaps i should be converting myself into the 10%. playing a numbers game isnt an altogether bad strategy as such.

Oh man witty trumps 6'2 ALWAYS!

maybe for you. but most grls wont even look at a guy no matter what his qualities are if hes not tall. height is an initial filter.

HMF--again, see the vicarious drama thing above. :) Also, I'm a matchmaker of sorts, so yes, I do have a vested interest.

Ask yourself this, but honestly. How many of these 'creepy' guys were good looking?

That's so funny, because a lot of times, I know I and other women have often lamented the times good-looking men ruin the illusion by opening their mouths. Another aside--the most gorgeous man I've ever met in my life did absolutely NOTHING for me because he was a dick who thought that given his flawless visage, courtesy was unnecessary.

Also, I'm a matchmaker of sorts

life is much easier on line....

Also, I'm a matchmaker of sorts, so yes, I do have a vested interest

I meant personal vested interest. like for example this comment

"That's why I don't go to bars and clubs anymore. :) "

Why would you, irrespective if the bars and clubs had the sleaziest of the sleze or the harvard seminary? Which actually brings up sort of another point. why do married or dating women still wear all the makeup and designer clothes and go out?

That's so funny, because a lot of times, I know I and other women have often lamented the times good-looking men ruin the illusion by opening their mouths

well, all I can say is, every time I've seen a woman identify someone else as creepy, he's never been good looking. Also, keep in mind, I'm talking about the localized time and space of a single encounter. Not a case where a woman dates a good looking guy then after 5 months decides he's a dick and this and that and everything else.

I'm talking about the localized time and space

that is how you can tell if your really desi. you make the bar scene sound like the space time continueum

that is how you can tell if your really desi. you make the bar scene sound like the space time continueum

delta_x * delta_t

I meant

delta_x * delta_t should be less than 300 ft-mins

Which actually brings up sort of another point. why do married or dating women still wear all the makeup and designer clothes and go out

that is so obnoxious..once again, I am married NOT DEAD

Why would you, irrespective if the bars and clubs had the sleaziest of the sleze or the harvard seminary? Which actually brings up sort of another point. why do married or dating women still wear all the makeup and designer clothes and go out

That's absolutely ridiculous. Just because I'm "off the market," doesn't mean that I'm gonna NOT make an effort to be attractive when I go out. This also presupposes that the entire purpose of getting dressed up is to snag a man--you forget that a lot of women dress for other women. Fancy plumage is no longer confined to the mating call.

Um, and I usually used to bars and clubs with my fiance, because we like to drink, we like to dance, and the pulsating mass of sweaty bodies was occasionally fodder for our erotic life. Of course, that got old as I got older, and having to deal with the rather persistent men who approached me when my fiance was in the boys' room became reason enough to rethink my recreational activities.

Also, keep in mind, I'm talking about the localized time and space of a single encounter. Not a case where a woman dates a good looking guy then after 5 months decides he's a dick and this and that and everything else.

I hear you on this. But I'm talking about the localized time and space of a single encounter as well. There are actually a lot of good-looking guys who think they can get away with saying some very inappropriate things without nary an introduction to break the ice.

There are actually a lot of good-looking guys who think they can get away with saying some very inappropriate things without nary an introduction to break the ice.

they probably think this because they get away with it...a lot. because they are attractive.

That is, I used to frequent bars and clubs with my fiance.

Sorry, I'm having trouble commenting, so I just wanted to do a "test post" to see what's wrong...

i never liked the bar scene. a lot of sleazy guys and grls throwing themselves at them. disturbing at best.

to see what's wrong...

Satya and HMF are going to challenge each other to a duel.. thats whats up! ;)

LAME. Ok, repost:

Perhaps I should restate using more clear terms:
when you get sleazy guys sexually harassing/assaulting you all the time, it makes it less fun to go out, particularly to bars...

thanks, ak :) I appreciate the compliment! Just to clarify, I wasn't saying this to be self-effacing or to fish; I was just trying to be honest about my own self-perception lest anyone think I'm arguing that I'm so hot that I can't help but be sexually assaulted by guys ;)

Puli, I wasn't trying to be discouraging... Just saying my friends are not all La Perla clad, and I think only one qualifies as a skinny minnie (she's a marathoner). That said, they are all awesome, beautiful, brilliant, down-to-earth, and talented women.

HMF, I would say 30-50% of "creepy" guys are physically attractive on first sight (whatever that means). Good looking guys tend to have a twin-problem to creepiness, which I like to term "chronic flaming asshole syndrome."

Just because I'm "off the market," doesn't mean that I'm gonna NOT make an effort to be attractive when I go out. This also presupposes that the entire purpose of getting dressed up is to snag a man--you forget that a lot of women dress for other women

But didn't you just use the word 'attractive'? Isn't the purpose of being attractive is to ....attract? and isn't the 'make other women jealous' factor just secondary (and not a healthy justification anyway, if you ask me)

Um, and I usually used to bars and clubs with my fiance, because we like to drink

That's fine. Then the dressing up is for him.

Of course, that got old as I got older, and having to deal with the rather persistent men who approached me when my fiance was in the boys' room became reason enough to rethink my recreational activities.

Well, either your fiance takes some serious dumps that take up a lot of time, or you're just a serious hottie that screams 'come talk to me' in her mannerism/body language in the alone time window when your fiance leaves your side.

Also, don't people with fiances wear rings? Id think most guys over the age of 25 are accustomed to checking.

Just saying my friends are not all La Perla clad

dispite the fantasy i was amusing myself with on this blog. that really isnt my MO.

That said, they are all awesome, beautiful, brilliant, down-to-earth, and talented women.

why the heck dont i meet such women? geez.

which I like to term "chronic flaming asshole syndrome."

they are probably @ssh0les cause they are incented to be assh0les. it probably works. they probably get a lot of...cause they r hansome, so dont really need a personality.

they probably think this because they get away with it...a lot. because they are attractive.

Alas, you're probably right about this. Perhaps I'm in the minority of women who think that if a handsome man is disrespectful and lacking in manners, he may as well be Carrot Top, for all I care. :)

Also, don't people with fiances wear rings? Id think most guys over the age of 25 are accustomed to checking.

HMF, if only a ring was enough to stop men (and women) from hooking up/cheating .....

HMF, if only a ring was enough to stop men (and women) from hooking up/cheating .....

one of my friends once spent a whole day bragging to me about how he f*cked xyz's w!fe. made me sick to the stomach.

one of my friends once spent a whole day bragging to me about how he f*cked xyz's w!fe. made me sick to the stomach.

I was pretty close to that opportunity myself, as difficult as it was, I turned it down though. what goes around comes around

Does anyone know what a "your comment text is not allowed" error is? I looked for open HTML tags, etc., but no luck.

Puli, I think that's precisely why attractive guys (and girls for that matter) tend to be ass-hats.

I think part of looking attractive is to be attractive to oneself as well, HMF. Sometimes women like to look good for themselves, not just for the other 1/2 of the species :) Also, you'd be amazed at how many guys will hot on a girl when her date is away. (getting through masses of bodies can take a long time, as can waiting in a restroom line).

whatever dude. i dig smart grls.

Puli, you rock.

But didn't you just use the word 'attractive'? Isn't the purpose of being attractive is to ....attract? and isn't the 'make other women jealous' factor just secondary (and not a healthy justification anyway, if you ask

There's a difference between wanting to be perceived as pretty, having it together, fit, etc. and being on the prowl. I got married a few months ago and have yet to exchange my cute skirts for polyester slacks. My husband married me because he likes who I am, and I dress the way I do because it fits my personality and makes me feel good.

It sounds like you have a really specific idea of how married/taken women are supposed to behave. My decision to have a lifelong partner in crime didn't come with riders on how I'm supposed to dress!

Well, either your fiance takes some serious dumps that take up a lot of time, or you're just a serious hottie that screams 'come talk to me' in her mannerism/body language in the alone time window when your fiance leaves your side.

Yeah, and let me list some of the behaviors I've seen men read as "screaming 'come talk to me/grab my @ss/make obscene gestures at me'":

Talking to a friend
Reading in a coffee shop
Walking down the street
Tying my shoes
Cleaning up after my dog
Running for the train

And yes, standing at a bar alone. Because being alone in a bar (even if it's just because your husband is running late or in the bathroom) is like wearing a neon sign that says 'I NEED SEX', right? Yeesh.

But didn't you just use the word 'attractive'? Isn't the purpose of being attractive is to ....attract? and isn't the 'make other women jealous' factor just secondary (and not a healthy justification anyway, if you ask me)

Okay, then I amend my language. Gorgeous? Beautiful? Comely? And I didn't say "dressing for other women" is to make them jealous. I think there's an interesting, albeit unintentional, homoerotic satisfaction a woman gets when another woman checks her out. Also, just because I'm in a relationship, it doesn't mean that I don't admire beauty in both other men and women. You can do so without wanting to either date or screw the person. I also think that in some ways, wanting to appear desirable to other people, regardless of whether you are in a relationship or not, is natural to both men and women. Whenever a man on the street stops me just to say he thinks I'm beautiful, I'm flattered--of course, when that's accompanied by crass sexual innuendo and blatant disrespect, that's a different story.

Well, either your fiance takes some serious dumps that take up a lot of time, or you're just a serious hottie that screams 'come talk to me' in her mannerism/body language in the alone time window when your fiance leaves your side.

Ha ha!! I gotta admit--this made me LOL. Actually, more often than not, he goes outside to smoke. A disgusting habit he's trying to break. I don't think I'm a particularly flirtatious person, either. I'm actually excruciatingly shy, so my mannerisms aren't that inviting. To get the record straight, I don't think the men who approach me are generally assholes--having to deal with that aspect of bar/club life gets to be a bit laborious, though, which is why I said I no longer frequent them (unless it's the happy hour scene with the impregnable fortress of friends).

Also, don't people with fiances wear rings? Id think most guys over the age of 25 are accustomed to checking.

Well, he's my long-term boyfriend but we only got engaged in March, at which time neither of us was really into the bar scene. Funny thing is that I seem to get approached now more than ever, which is odd--I thought that "taken" men were attractive to women, but not vice-versas. I don't have a diamond rock either (don't believe in 'em), and people don't seem to take my modest sapphire piece very seriously.

Sometimes women like to look good for themselves, not just for the other 1/2 of the species

the reason i like to dress well, i maintly for myself. i can understand that.

I think there's an interesting, albeit unintentional, homoerotic satisfaction a woman gets when another woman checks her out.

Unless, of course, it IS intentional... :)

Other than that... what Satya and Camille said.

guys take anything as a signal that a grl wants to f-ck them. its how we get through our day. dont take that too seriously...

Oh, that's so true. Girl-on-girl check-out and outfit flattering can honestly be such a great "pick me up" (meant in the sense of a sunny day, not flirting) kinda compliment. Oh, and what's wrong with wanting to look good for your (married) SO? I think there's something nice about that, too.

sarah, I totally LOL'd at your list because it is so true. My friend and I joke about how we must look too approachable, so we've had to cultivate "F--- off" faces... but that means that the guys who approach us (when we're wearing said faces) are that much crazier.

but that means that the guys who approach us (when we're wearing said faces) are that much crazier.

they might think you look "sultry" and like you like to "be on top" and hence hit on you. guys are h0rny all the time. best to assume thats always the case.

Yeah, and let me list some of the behaviors I've seen men read as "screaming 'come talk to me/grab my @ss/make obscene gestures at me'":

Talking to a friend
Reading in a coffee shop
Walking down the street
Tying my shoes
Cleaning up after my dog
Running for the train

Amen to that, Sarah. Luckily, I personally haven't experienced the obscenity that much in bars (I seem to get that on the street more than anywhere else), but I've definitely noticed that when I'm unaccompanied, that's sometimes seen as a sexual invitation, for whatever reason. The defensiveness and downright nastiness that's associated with this behavior is also particularly frustrating. I've gotten a great deal of "fuck you, bitch" and "you ain't all that" remarks whilst running to catch my train as well, because I didn't turn around to talk to some guy.

guys take anything as a signal that a grl wants to f-ck them. its how we get through our day. dont take that too seriously...

The problem usually occurs when THEY take it too seriously.

For real, the other day some dudes in a fancy pick up truck pulled up next to me and a random East Asian woman who were walking down the street. They started hitting on us and saying all this racist stuff to the Asian woman. I started yelling at them, and they actually got mad when I didn't take it as a compliment. It got ugly... b**ch, c**t, they even called me the n-word (which was odd, since I am white) and started threatening me. And that's not really terribly unusual, although this was one of the worst incidents. Some guys think their fantasies are real, and get very very upset when they realize you aren't playing.

Oh, and what's wrong with wanting to look good for your (married) SO? I think there's something nice about that, too.

Camille,
On behalf of the married SMers out here - thanks

After reading HMFs comment I was half wondering if the correct dress code for married SM ( women) mutineers at the next meet up is sans makeup, stricly no-label clothing :-) ( no lipstick for you, you are married!!) .The hilarious bit about this , is in Delhi at least if you are married you HAVE to have lipstick on.As someone who rarely wears lipstick, this was beaten into me by mom-in-law, aunts etc etc

The defensiveness and downright nastiness that's associated with this behavior is also particularly frustrating. I've gotten a great deal of "fuck you, bitch" and "you ain't all that" remarks whilst running to catch my train as well, because I didn't turn around to talk to some guy.

Yeah, exactly!! You're a stuck-up bitch if you want to, you know, go about your life without stopping to stroke some idiot's ego. Because you obviously don't have anything better to do.

Argh. I don't have a car, and this has gone from an annoyance to a serious problem where I live (Fishtown, in Philly). Note to random strangers: think whatever you want to think inside your head, but leave me out of it!

And yes, standing at a bar alone. Because being alone in a bar (even if it's just because your husband is running late or in the bathroom) is like wearing a neon sign that says 'I NEED SEX', right? Yeesh.

And that's exactly what I said, right? Because 'come talk to me' = 'i need sex' Seriously, its bullshit exaggerations like this that really get my noodle. If you want to be taken seriously, try and represent what the other person is saying accurately.

I got married a few months ago and have yet to exchange my cute skirts for polyester slacks. My husband married me because he likes who I am, and I dress the way I do because it fits my personality and makes me feel good.

It's these types of attempts to explain away things that really make me lose faith in female logic entirely (if it ever existed in the first place) 'fits your personality'? sorry, but this comes off a bit vague. I can understand it if you do it when you go together, but when you do it going out with other females? it just strikes me as odd.

I met a 40 year old woman in LA who got a facelift and she pulled this 'makes me feel good' sh*t there too. (although face lift is a bit more extreme than just makeup) It was obvious she did it for her husband, so he'd not stray away towards the younger women. Just admit shit.

Whenever a man on the street stops me just to say he thinks I'm beautiful, I'm flattered

Here you make it seem as its something that just occurs, without any proactive measures on your part, But I'm talking about actively deciding to use makeup, dress as one did before they became hitched.. the only explanation is one does it to receive this flattery? Some kind of ego-feeding?

" guys are h0rny all the time."

That's why they come so soon when they finally get it.

Some guys think their fantasies are real, and get very very upset when they realize you aren't playing.

ok....then dont take it too seriously when I think you all want me. its how I get through MY day.

That's why they come so soon when they finally get it.

thats why they say, a hard man is good to find....errr...wait. no. thats not what they say..

maybe for you. but most grls wont even look at a guy no matter what his qualities are if hes not tall. height is an initial filter.

I read this and went in to full-on "Akka" mode and started hissing about how them bitches don't deserve you anyway and you're better off without someone so inflexible/shallow.

I used to do it, too. Insist that dream guy had to be a min of 6 feet tall, because that means I'll get 5'10...which is what I had as my "floor". Ah, code-breaking matrimonial ads/website profiles...god times. Before ankle-hell, I lived in 3-4" heels and that's how tall I am in heels- 5'10. One of my closest friends in college dated a guy who was exactly one inch taller than she was...and he used to give her so much shit if she didn't wear flats, because he had such a complex about it. I'm glad they broke up.

Anyway, it made me not want to have anything to do with someone who is THAT insecure or consumed with their height, so yeah, 5'10 = solid. BUT. One of my favorite bfs of all time was 5'7. His first email to me caused much swooning and after that, it was on, I'll never forget those butterflies. By the time he showed up at Strada, I forgot how tall either of us was--our first date was magic.

If it's good, it's good, height be damned. You need the girl who is going to be so excited about your sense of humor, your attentiveness and your other awesome qualities, that everything she thought she wanted goes out the fucking window when she realizes how fantastic you are...and vise versa.

/akka mode

Sarah 169,

I just saw that you live in Fishtown, I used to live a couple of years back in Old City and had many friends in Fishtown. It was getting slowly gentrified. Do you feel that way about the neighborhood?

sarah, so true. Some men get super nasty/scary when I don't return their advances. I was like, "Seriously? Do you really think that all of a sudden I'm going to go: 'Oh, I didn't think you were sexy before, but now I am soooo hot for you!'"

Puli, that would totally explain why crazy guys are being hyper-explicit when they approach me. Although to be honest, I could have a plastic expression on my face, and I'm sure someone would give me crap.

HMF, I'm just baffled by your expectations of women and their motivations in their choices re: dress/style.

But I'm talking about actively deciding to use makeup, dress as one did before they became hitched.. the only explanation is one does it to receive this flattery? Some kind of ego-feeding?

This is funny to me because I've read a lot of snarky commentary from men who complain that their wives aren't sexy, don't wear makeup, and don't dress the way they used to before the two got married. Newsflash: men and women still feel a need to be attractive to each other, even after they're hitched. Why can't you understand this?

As far as looking nice in environments outside one's relationship, I think I'd be disingenuous if I said that it wasn't partially about flattery or ego-feeding. Then again, I feel the same way when someone makes a comment about my creativity or intelligence. Also, women are largely perceived and judged on the basis of their looks, so while that may not be something I agree with, it's extremely difficult to extricate yourself from it altogether. I work in the advertising sector and I definitely have noticed that people in this field tend to treat you better when you're "dolled up" vs. casual Fridays, when you're clad in jeans and sneakers, sans makeup (like me today, for instance--dressing up can be tedious at times).

It's these types of attempts to explain away things that really make me lose faith in female logic entirely (if it ever existed in the first place)

Really, that was unnecessary.

I read this and went in to full-on "Akka" mode and started hissing about how them bitches don't deserve you anyway and you're better off without someone so inflexible/shallow.

good in theory. not in practice.

And that's exactly what I said, right? Because 'come talk to me' = 'i need sex' Seriously, its bullshit exaggerations like this that really get my noodle. If you want to be taken seriously, try and represent what the other person is saying accurately.

Why exactly do you think they want to come and talk to us? To hear our thoughts on politics and literature?

It's these types of attempts to explain away things that really make me lose faith in female logic entirely (if it ever existed in the first place) 'fits your personality'? sorry, but this comes off a bit vague. I can understand it if you do it when you go together, but when you do it going out with other females? it just strikes me as odd.

First of all, there's no such thing as 'female logic'. There's logic, and women use it just like men do.

Second, how can you say that without knowing how I dress? I'm not really given to halter tops and red stilettos and the like. I tend to wear jeans, denim skirts, and fitted t-shirts (funny/political slogans a plus), plus chunky glasses. Yes, I wear that sort of thing when going out with other women, with my husband, with mixed groups of friends, you name it. That's what I'm wearing at work right now. Is that modest enough for you? I mean, what should I wear, a burlap sack? Seriously, you need to consider the idea that women, while under social pressure to be 'pretty', also wear things and do things for our own reasons that have nothing to do with whatever random man might be looking at us at that moment.

Here you make it seem as its something that just occurs, without any proactive measures on your part, But I'm talking about actively deciding to use makeup, dress as one did before they became hitched.. the only explanation is one does it to receive this flattery? Some kind of ego-feeding?

It seems like changing your wardrobe entirely would be a much more 'active' decision than keeping it the same. I've had corporate jobs where I was required to wear makeup, and days when I have bad skin and wear it to cover up, and sometimes I just wear it because it matches my outfit. Didn't realize wearing lipstick would be taken as an active request for sex. I better tell my grandma, she wears it every day.

And yes, it DOES 'just occur.' I get stopped on the street when I'm wearing sweats and a baggy T-shirt and no makeup. It happens because men feel like it's perfectly OK for them to comment on women's looks without invitation, not because women are 'feeding our egos'. And for the record, it's one thing to be politely complimented, but hoots and grabs on the street? NOT FUN. NOT EGO-FEEDING. Most women are embarrassed, annoyed, sometimes even threatened by it. If you're approaching a woman on the street, you have NO IDEA whether the last five guys who approached her were polite, or obscene, or even violent.

Then again, the Iranian religious police have come up with a great way to solve street harassment...

Puli, that would totally explain why crazy guys are being hyper-explicit when they approach me. Although to be honest, I could have a plastic expression on my face, and I'm sure someone would give me crap.

oh, baby! plastic! yeah! yeah!thats SO hot!....never mind.

By the time he showed up at Strada, I forgot how tall either of us was--our first date was magic.

good in theory. not in practice.

OY. Listen, kozhandai...when you're my age, then you get to be bitter and cynical. Believe-- she's out there.

As my mother used to annoy the shit out of me by repeating endlessly, "Obwiously the time is not right for you to meet...(dun, dun DUN)...the vun. Maybe you are not ready yet. If you met them, it would not work. Go fix vatewer is wrong vith you, because this is getting boring"-etc. ;)

I just saw that you live in Fishtown, I used to live a couple of years back in Old City and had many friends in Fishtown. It was getting slowly gentrified. Do you feel that way about the neighborhood?

Brown, I definitely do. We've been there a little over a year and the restaurants, art galleries, etc. are popping up all over the place. The rents are still affordable (that's why we live there) but they tower over what they were a few years ago.

There's still a big drug problem in the neighborhood, and there's also a lot of resentment between the folks who've grown up there and the hip new crowd. The hip new crowd is also much more diverse, and while Fishtown has come a long way (from what I understand) there's still a lot of racism.

I was into it for a while, but I've been through enough lately that I'm ready to get out of there and flee to West Philly where my friends live!

And for the record, it's one thing to be politely complimented, but hoots and grabs on the street? NOT FUN. NOT EGO-FEEDING. Most women are embarrassed, annoyed, sometimes even threatened by it.

Exactly the distinction I was trying to make.

Seriously, you need to consider the idea that women, while under social pressure to be 'pretty', also wear things and do things for our own reasons that have nothing to do with whatever random man might be looking at us at that moment.

Bingo. Sartorial choices are an amalgam of lots of stuff. Maybe on an unconscious level, they are about "attracting" others, but it's simplistic to reduce it to exclusively that motive.

Some of the most vile, repulsive, blatantly sexual stuff I've ever encountered from men hasn't been when I was dressed up and out with the girls, but rather, when I was modestly garbed and minddng my own beeswax.

Sarah,

Thanks for your response, that is what I had thought of the neighborhood when I was there. Although parts of West Philly are really nice but I really liked living in Old City with all the galleries and the nice restaurants.

Brown, I'm with you-- I like Old City a lot but the rents are totally out of my reach!

Sarah,

Following up on my earlier post, I am not sure what your budget is, but there are some really nice affordable places, my building was an old factory converted into apartments and it was reasonable, it was on second and race. I am not sure what the scene now is, it used to be managed by Brandywine. Hopefully you will get to your comfort zone fast.
Now back to regular programming :)

That's what I'm wearing at work right now. Is that modest enough for you? I mean, what should I wear, a burlap sack? Seriously, you need to consider the idea that women, while under social pressure to be 'pretty', also wear things and do things for our own reasons that have nothing to do with whatever random man might be looking at us at that moment.

No, thats exactly what I'm not saying in fact. I was just pointing out a logical flaw in continuing to do certain actions that were primarily for the attraction of men, after that goal has been satisfied.

And for the record, it's one thing to be politely complimented, but hoots and grabs on the street? NOT FUN. NOT EGO-FEEDING. Most women are embarrassed, annoyed, sometimes even threatened by it.

Please point out where I said hoots and grabs were acceptable? Or where did I even broach this subject at all? This is what Im talking about when I say misrepresentation.

I made the comment about being approached while in the line for a bathroom, and only suggested that because its such a short time window, there might be something particular about Satya that says to a guy "hey come to talk to me"

Secondly.. I will make a general comment however.. not related to any one persons anecdote here.

When a woman does dress provocatively, they are indeed sending out the message, "I am sexy", not "I need sex" but "I am someone who it's beneficial to have sex with" does this authorize gropes and grinds and lift up by thighs? NO, again I'll say it: NO IT DOES NOT. However, you cannot come back with the 'deer in the headlights' look with "what what?" when you see and hear signs that a guy is 'thinking' about it.? When that is the clear goal. Get me?

So it's somewhat confusing to see a married woman, without her husband in a club engaging in this kind of action.. that's the point I was trying to make.

If anyone else has meetup-related questions, ask them now, I'm getting ready to close this thread.

I read an account somewhere of a FTM person that post-op, he noticed that the frequency of his daily thoughts about sex multiplied manifold. Not an attempt to justify sexual assault or obnoxious behavior, but biology and hormones may play a not insignificant part in this. Is razib around? :)

way to stay on topic...

I was just pointing out a logical flaw in continuing to do certain actions that were primarily for the attraction of men, after that goal has been satisfied.

Attempting to fit logic to the recondite, endlessly cthonic realm of sexuality is futile. There is nothing logical about the terrain of sexuality. Absolutely nothing.

I made the comment about being approached while in the line for a bathroom, and only suggested that because its such a short time window, there might be something particular about Satya that says to a guy "hey come to talk to me"

As it's been mentioned before, a woman simply being by herself sends the "message" that she's fair game. And as I mentioned before, I'm quite shy and positively lacking in feminine wiles, so I don't think that I'm responsible for men hitting on me despite the fact that I'm with someone else.

When a woman does dress provocatively, they are indeed sending out the message, "I am sexy", not "I need sex" but "I am someone who it's beneficial to have sex with" does this authorize gropes and grinds and lift up by thighs? NO, again I'll say it: NO IT DOES NOT. However, you cannot come back with the 'deer in the headlights' look with "what what?" when you see and hear signs that a guy is 'thinking' about it.? When that is the clear goal. Get me?

Perhaps, but this begs the question: why is it that so many women tend to be approached NOT when they're dressed provocatively but when they're donning their least sexy duds, walking the dog, etc.? And I'm curious--you don't feel that physical assault is ever warranted, but what about verbal abuse or inappropriate comments? Do you feel that just kind of comes with the territory of the nightclub?

All right, I guess no one cares to discuss the actual topic-- time to close.

Sorry, SM intern. Don't know how this mushroomed...I keep breaking that New Year's resolution of refraining from tangents.

I can answer all of these points in email if you want. i generally want to respect the wishes of the mods about staying on topic.