# It will be difficult to stamp out unwanted sex advances, because they (sometimes) work **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 4, 2017, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567 "2017-12-04T19:40:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/61 "2017-12-06T17:44:20Z")
> [@nelliebly](#): > > SO is the problem that some guys just suck at reading other people? Because really, that’s all this boils down to. If someone can’t read other people, he goes with the BS he sees in movies and hears in popular songs: dweeby guy wants hot woman, she turns him down, he keeps trying, she falls for him. . Pretty much all guys suck at reading women. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/62 "2017-12-06T18:14:36Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > I remain confused about the point of this thread. > > If you’re in a work environment, it doesn’t matter whether you’re hearing no because she’s “playing hard to get” or because she really doesn’t want to go out. After a few asks, you have to stop in order to avoid a hostile work environment, especially if the response was “no”. So, “playing hard to get”, as much as that exists, should not be a concern in a work environment, since you have to back off anyway. > > If you’re not in a work environment, what negative effects do you think will happen if you persist, that wouldn’t have happened for time immemorial? You’ll either be accepted, rejected, mocked, etc., but that has always been true. You won’t get into any legal trouble if you’re hassling a friend, as long as you’re not stalking. > > So, can you clarify the point of this thread? I don’t understand what you’re saying about the work environment. Why would you have to back off “anyway”? If the guy believes or convinces himself that the woman really wants him and is playing hard to get - or even if he thinks she doesn’t but will be won over by his charm and persistence - then he is not going to think he needs to back off, because everything is going to work out in the end when she comes around, and hostile work environment won’t be a factor. But in any event, the thread wasn’t about specific negative consequences or necessarily about work situations. There has been a move to change societal attitudes and to reduce societal tolerance for things like pestering women for sex or relationships, and thereby cut down on that practice. The point of the OP was that: It will be difficult to stamp out unwanted sex advances, because they (sometimes) work. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/63 "2017-12-06T18:50:39Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I don’t understand what you’re saying about the work environment. Why would you have to back off “anyway”? If the guy believes or convinces himself that the woman really wants him and is playing hard to get - or even if he thinks she doesn’t but will be won over by his charm and persistence - then he is not going to think he needs to back off, because everything is going to work out in the end when she comes around, and hostile work environment won’t be a factor. > > But in any event, the thread wasn’t about specific negative consequences or necessarily about work situations. There has been a move to change societal attitudes and to reduce societal tolerance for things like pestering women for sex or relationships, and thereby cut down on that practice. The point of the OP was that: It will be difficult to stamp out unwanted sex advances, because they (sometimes) work. Because, in a work environment, he has to back off whether he thinks she’s playing hard to get or not, because otherwise he’s risking creating a hostile work environment. That’s a big no-no and will get him into trouble. So, _even if he thinks she’s playing hard to get, and even if she is playing hard to get_, after asking once or twice or so, he should leave the door open for her and stop asking. Agreed? I disagree that there has been a change in societal attitudes regarding hassling women for dates in a personal setting. None of the big cases are about that – they are about workplace harassment (where the workplace in the entertainment field may be a hotel room), sexual harassment, and sexual assault. I do agree that unwanted sex advances will continue in the personal sphere (and probably in the work sphere as well, unfortunately). So what? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/64 "2017-12-06T18:53:19Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > Because, in a work environment, he has to back off whether he thinks she’s playing hard to get or not, because otherwise he’s risking creating a hostile work environment. That’s a big no-no and will get him into trouble. So, _even if he thinks she’s playing hard to get, and even if she is playing hard to get_, after asking once or twice or so, he should leave the door open for her and stop asking. Agreed? You’re asking about what he “should” do, and the thread is about what he “would” do. > [@](#): > > I disagree that there has been a change in societal attitudes regarding hassling women for dates in a personal setting. OK. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/65 "2017-12-06T18:59:32Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > You’re asking about what he “should” do, and the thread is about what he “would” do. I’m saying what he _must_ do to avoid getting into trouble at work. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/66 "2017-12-06T19:02:12Z")
Then we’re going in circles. Why would he get in trouble “even if she is playing hard to get” and she really wants a relationship with him? ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/67 "2017-12-06T19:23:59Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Then we’re going in circles. > > Why would he get in trouble “even if she is playing hard to get” and she really wants a relationship with him? Because, in a workplace environment, it’s inappropriate to continue asking. After asking two or three times, he should back off and say, “OK, no problem about lunch. If you’re ever interested in grabbing a bite to eat with me, just let me know.” This was true before Al Franken got ready to resign and before Louis CK did that weird stuff he did. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/68 "2017-12-06T20:05:27Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Then we’re going in circles. Indeed. > [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Why would he get in trouble “even if she is playing hard to get” and she really wants a relationship with him? Then she will make it very clear to him if he backs off due to her initial rejection. To the extent that initiating a relationship is sometimes a game that people play, those who do so well, get it. Those who do not, should err on the side of caution and back the fuck off when they are rejected. Your post(s) beg(s) the question whether you’ve much experience with dating & relationships. Or are you simply arguing for the sport of it? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/69 "2017-12-06T20:07:09Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > I’m saying what he _must_ do to avoid getting into trouble at work. More importantly, he must do so in order not to be a dick and respect the woman’s wishes. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/70 "2017-12-06T20:26:31Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > More importantly, he must do so in order not to be a dick and respect the woman’s wishes. Well, yes, that’s obvious enough to me, but apparently not everyone here. As I mention above, when someone is disciplined or fired for harassment, I bet it’s pretty rare that it takes his co-workers, male or female, by surprise. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/71 "2017-12-06T20:28:27Z")
Agreed. I don’t know why we’re even having to have\* this\* fucking conversation. But of course, here we are. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/72 "2017-12-06T21:01:50Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Your post(s) beg(s) the question whether you’ve much experience with dating & relationships. Or are you simply arguing for the sport of it? Is that all the options? Can I get, like maybe, a third option? Like how about: certain people here are unable or unwilling to consider that there might be a difference between “it’s proper behavior to do X” and “regardless of whether or not it’s proper to do X, it’s inevitable that many people will do it anyway”. I like Option 3 the best. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/73 "2017-12-06T21:06:22Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Is that all the options? Can I get, like maybe, a third option? > > Like how about: certain people here are unable or unwilling to consider that there might be a difference between “it’s proper behavior to do X” and “regardless of whether or not it’s proper to do X, it’s inevitable that many people will do it anyway”. > > I like Option 3 the best. YMMV. Gosh, this is frustrating. Yes, people will do it anyway. Agreed! However, if they do it at work, they should expect to get in trouble. Do you agree? Do you agree that, after a couple of brush-offs in a work environment, he should back off and just leave the option open for her? People will do it anyway in a non-work environment. Agreed! And, nothing will happen to them, and they won’t be cast out of society. They may lose a friend or friends, but that’s the risk they take. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/74 "2017-12-06T21:08:55Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > Yes, people will do it anyway. Agreed! However, if they do it at work, they **should** expect to get in trouble. Do you agree? Do you agree that, after a couple of brush-offs in a work environment, he **should** back off and just leave the option open for her? (emphasis added). QED. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/75 "2017-12-06T21:14:14Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > (emphasis added). > > QED. Yes, uh, well played. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/76 "2017-12-06T21:20:08Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Is that all the options? Can I get, like maybe, a third option? > > I like Option 3 the best. YMMV. You read my mind. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/77 "2017-12-06T22:57:39Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > (emphasis added). > > QED. I’ve changed my mind on this. I think you should find a target at work and ask her daily out to lunch. After she gets fed up with your repeated requests, she’ll bite the bullet and go to HR. You get fired. Then, you can write a blog post on an MRA site about how you got fired for simply asking someone out to lunch. Can’t men and women go to lunch together anymore? Fox News will pick it up and complain about the PC police firing someone simply for wanting to have lunch with someone. Someone here will post it to the Stupid SJW Bullshit Of The Day thread. Then, you’ll get hired as a Fox commentator, making some large multiple of your current salary. And, we can say we knew F-P back when he used to post here! It’s win-win! ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2017, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/78 "2017-12-06T23:05:21Z")
I think \*\*F-P \*\*understands more than he pretends. He’s just _playing hard to get_. ---
**Author:** ![HelenGawn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a88e4f/32.png) [@HelenGawn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HelenGawn)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2017, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/79 "2017-12-07T02:00:26Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Sometimes it is, sometimes it’s not. > > But even ambiguity itself is also a form of deception, and if the target saw through it and appreciated what was being done, then there would be no ambiguity. So the effort to create ambiguity is relying on the notion that the target will not fully appreciate what’s going on. > > But as above, it’s a lot broader than that. Psychologists have put forth various theories on how and why playing hard to get works. See e.g. [here](https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/kzzxya/playing-hard-to-get-is-effective-according-to-psych-researchers), or [here](https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-attraction-doctor/201403/when-should-you-play-hard-get), et al. Thank you so much for the mansplaining. As a woman I need women’s behavior explained to me. Both of your links are about people who are already in some sort of romantic or sexual relationship maintaining an image of independence and mystery. It does not address initiating a relationship by continued haranguing. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2017, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567/80 "2017-12-07T02:25:54Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Is that all the options? Can I get, like maybe, a third option? > > Like how about: certain people here are unable or unwilling to consider that there might be a difference between “it’s proper behavior to do X” and “regardless of whether or not it’s proper to do X, it’s inevitable that many people will do it anyway”. > > I like Option 3 the best. YMMV. I’m honestly trying to understand if your point is more profound than what it seems. The only conclusion I can reach is that no, it’s not profound at all, and in fact, is every bit as simple as saying the crime of shoplifting will never go away because sometimes it works. Because, as we know, sometimes instead of getting caught red-handed and arrested, shoplifters succeed in taking merchandise. And this success rate apparently is high enough to offset the risk of getting caught and prosecuted. So it continues. Okay, so let’s assume you are right. So what? What do you want us to debate? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-will-be-difficult-to-stamp-out-unwanted-sex-advances-because-they-sometimes-work/803567.md?page=5)