This is also true for “attractive” people.
The receptionist is probably told by her boss that she must smile at customers and act engaging towards them; including at some workplaces engaging in casual conversation. Such behavior is likely to have nothing at all to do with wanting sexual advances from them.
True, but there is a clear difference between “Thanks for shopping with Safeway! smile” and “Wow! That’s a great T-Shirt! I love Bandname! gleaming smile”. If someone takes mandated corporate friendliness as flirting, that’s someone who doesn’t understand relationship signals and should just not ask any stranger out.
BTW, there was a story a little while back about the cashiers at Safeway complaining that corporate required them to smile at every customer and some customers took that as meaning the cashier was interested. The cashiers were pushing back because they didn’t want to get written up for not smiling at a customer they thought might cause problems. https://apnews.com/article/6a186d5d0d7dad4689dc14e30bd6d3bc
Since this is getting discussed more, I have a few questions about this.
What do you mean that you were “deconstructing” sexual harassment training for the feds?
What is your conclusion about the quote above? Was a definition of sexual harassment provided to the audience? Was the salesman trying to sell the receptionist something? (How did the audience – or the receptionist – know he was a salesman?).
Which is true whatever they look like.
And I’d allow them one ask at a singles bar. Context matters.
And in that situation with the receptionist it’s almost always going to be mandated corporate friendliness.
When someone has absorbed these life skills, I can see why they would believe that such skills are absorbed by “normal” people. There can be an assumption that someone with decent looks and a pleasant personality should have no trouble getting dates. In the past couple of years I was hanging out in the staff lounge with a group of women, mostly 20 or so years younger than me. One of them said “with the motorcycle, leather jacket, and ponytail you must have had women after you all the time.” I assured them that the opposite was true. But they knew me as the personable librarian who would do anything to help students and staff. They never knew me as the clueless guy who couldn’t read signals and was terrified of asking anyone out.
For those men who are genuinely struggling to understand what women want (as opposed to those playing “gotcha”), I have an analogy that may be helpful.
My dad occasionally likes to brag about his native intelligence, particularly as it applies to his natural ability to understand physics. We’ve all heard the story of how he not only got a perfect score on his physics achievement test (think SAT but for one particular subject–max score is 800, most would be thrilled with 650), but did so without even trying. He didn’t study, hardly came to class, and even forgot his book that he had to turn in on the day of the test–so he walked home, got it, walked back, turned it in, took the test, was the first one out the door, and got the only perfect score in the class.
Now, you might be reading this and thinking about how hard you had to work in school and how you didn’t even do as well. At the very least, even if you’re similarly gifted, you realize that not everyone is. And you’ve hopefully concluded, perhaps even before hearing this story, that some people are just going to outshine others with one hand tied behind their back, and that doesn’t mean the others’ efforts weren’t worthwhile. Certainly you wouldn’t conclude that slacking off was the path that would most increase your chances of getting a perfect score, and you would laugh at the idiocy of anyone who took that lesson from this story. Right?
Well, guess what? That’s what you’re doing when you conclude that women like aggressive jerks who don’t bother with consent. All you’re seeing is the guy waltzing in late and nailing it; what you fail to see is that he actually knew all the answers.
In dating, as in physics, you don’t get an A for effort. The guys who get lots of women have something you don’t, whether it’s looks, charm, or a certain magnetism that’s hard to explain. But they’re not cheating, and they’re not just lucking out picking all “C” answers. They’re actually getting consent; they’re just doing it so smoothly and naturally that you can’t even see it happening.
If it makes you feel any better, women aren’t any better at this stuff than men. Plenty of women never find themselves getting attention from these ultra-suave guys, nor do they know how to play that role themselves. The best most of us can hope for is to find one other awkward turtle we really click with, so we can flee the dating scene together.
You may not think anyone could ace it, but you may have trouble understanding how someone could give it their best and still strike out.
Of course I understand how someone could give it their best and still strike out. That is not at all inconsistent with what I wrote. My point was that you can’t just imitate the behavior of someone you see getting results, precisely because effort does not directly relate to success.
I wasn’t saying that you didn’t understand, but many wouldn’t. I’m sure I’ve been guilty of it myself.
I agree that there are some really clueless women as well. In a group of friends I had before, there was a woman who had done some research in grad school on dating and it was painfully obvious that she was completely oblivious to how flirting works. She was arguing that woman never take the first step because she surveyed a number of women asking if they had ever done those things, but had some cringeworthy questions, such as if they volunteered to do laundry for a guy. Another woman in the group was good at flirting and disagreed because she was good at showing interest in guys she thought were cute.
I spend in singles bars for a while back before I met my wife and it was interesting to watch the interactions. I think more men would do better if they were to slow down and just observe.
Probably would work for some, but not for all. When my Dad and brothers tried to teach me how to work on mechanical things it didn’t look that difficult, but I could never make my hands do it. No matter what the task, there are always some who just don’t get it. Higher math, mechanics/building, and dating were the big three zeros for me.
I’m a teacher and there are a wide range of abilities so I agree that no everyone can learn that way. In fact, that’s why I said “most men” rather than “all men”. Also, most people are terrible teachers for people who aren’t naturally good or at least average.
But there are few people who can really never learn a subject. I say that as a terrible singer who would cause people to flee the kareoka bars in terror whenever I attempted the Beetles’ “Yesterday”. I found a teacher who was good with horrible singers and learned a couple of songs.
My friend has a son on the spectrum and the occupational therapist teaches basic interaction skills such as understanding that other people will get bored so these are some specific things to look for. Also, there are specific things which his son was taught on having basic conversations.
I say that more men would go better if they were to slow down and observe, because you can see a lot by watching body language of strangers in bars. At first, you may miss things, but it’s possible to learn. That whole pickup artist thing was wrong in that it was an attempt to manipulate women, but there certainly is room for having someone more adept pointing out body language for the clueless.
Those who can teach those who have the most trouble learning, whatever the subject, have my deepest admiration. My biggest talent as an educator, I believe, is the ability to find something that every student does well.
My experience is that folks who are exceptional in some areas really have trouble when they find themselves below average in others, especially when no amount of practice and coaching seems to have an effect. I don’t know that I’m below average in math overall, since I didn’t hit the wall until Algebra 2. As a kid I would end up in tears any time I tried to build anything. Fortunately, I make enough money to pay others to do that for me. Finding someone able to work around my profound cluelessness made dating/mating ineptitude cease to be an issue.
I agree with everything you said, and also agree that sometimes it’s just easier to pay others to do things. However, sometimes even that doesn’t answer all the questions! I had a good friend in Japan who was a good guy but terminally clueless about women. He even joined a matchmaking service and would meet women, but they would be completely turned off. He needed help just with some of the very basics and then finally met someone that they hit it off and now they are married with kids.
I hear you, for the most part that was me. I wouldn’t exactly say I was clueless about women, just about dating them. I always had female friends who thought I’d be a great catch for someone. Ms. P still thinks I’m a great catch after a quarter century, so they weren’t completely wrong. They just left out “but it’s probably going to take you a long time because you’re a real doofus when it comes to dating.” I can’t tell you how good it feels to be able to joke about that now, which is why I’ll probably do it until the day I die.
I’m sure you are a good catch! In fact, the ironic thing about dating is that many people are not immediately attracted to attributes which make good long term partners, and it goes for all genders.
The ability to laugh at your foibles is one of the most underrated skills. Good for you!
I did just have an issue with a woman; I was trying to figure out how to get Ms. P’s leg off my thigh’s pressure point without waking her up. She did wake up for a second, but seems to have gone back to sleep. Earlier she asked if I wanted a margarita with dinner, and I said no thanks. She didn’t seem to have a problem with it.
That’s not quite what I took from Dr. Deth’s description of the video. It’s not that the handsome guy got a date and the schlub didn’t, but neutral observers were more likely to think the schlub had done something wrong just in asking.
I’ve known people who say that they don’t get math. I have another friend who can not read a map. I’m quite good at both of those things; I’ve occasionally wondered if I’d trade limitations with them.
Must be nice.
I can imagine that hearing more than once about my good fortune can be annoying to someone not as lucky. I apologize if I came across as gloating.
I managed to get around my ineptitude by using words and just focusing on friendship. I know not every guy would date a friend, but what I have with my husband grew out of an intimate friendship. And I’m pretty good with friends. And we are still intimate friends. One thing I can say about myself is that I’m a loyal friend and by extension a loyal wife. And I mean loyal in a broader sense than not just sleeping around. I mean in the sense of unwavering commitment. And some people just value that kind of thing above whether someone is skilled at the mating dance.