Fourth date: should I invite the guy over to watch DVDs if I don't plan on having sex

[donnamaybe]

Any guy who would assume he was invited over for sex when he was invited over to watch a DVD and then get pissed off when he discovered he was wrong would SO not care about whether or not he offended a woman in any given situation.

[fishtaco]

Any guy who would assume he was invited over for sex when he was invited over to watch a DVD and then get pissed off when he discovered he was wrong would SO not care about whether or not he offended a woman in any given situation.

 

You're not understanding my point. Nevermind. Keep on fighting, I'm out.

[donnamaybe]

You're not understanding my point. Nevermind. Keep on fighting, I'm out.

 

Well good then. Because you make no sense if you claim a guy who would get bent because his assumed night of sex didn't pan out would be the same guy who would care if he offended a woman.

[fishtaco]

Well good then. Because you make no sense if you claim a guy who would get bent because his assumed night of sex didn't pan out would be the same guy who would care if he offended a woman.

 

LOL, I already said I'm out yet you try to bait me back into the fight with a post that clearly shows you misunderstood my post.

 

I'm putting you on my ignore list. I think you should put me on yours too.

 

Nothing personal, I just don't like internet fights, and the best way to avoid it is to ignore people that have the tendency to start it.

 

Have a good day.

[flying]

Again... different people have different views. You think this way, ok. But does the guy think this way? Men and women think differently, we all know that. So if you care, you would stay clear of the areas that may misrepresent you, from the guy's perspective. Just like if the guy cares, he would stay away from areas that may offend the woman, even though he doesn't think it's a big deal.

 

Well, but that's exactly the point. I don't understand why people like VV and A_O are giving her a hard time for ASKING THE QUESTION, listening to the array of responses and then saying OK, I GOT IT, THANKS GUYS. Serious logic fail. But yes, this kind of pointless bashing of a poster as a way to lecture/demonize/throw one's weight around for the fun of it seems to be a common pastime.

Edited July 20, 2010 by flying
Through/= throw

[Phateless]

Why not? Women usually won't say, hey come over and have sex. They always say other things. And if you take what they say at face value and don't put the moves on them, then they get all offended and think you're weak and too scared to make a move. Think for a second from the guy's perspective... we CAN'T tell the difference.

 

I can tell the difference just fine. If she invites me over to watch DVDs, I'll make a move, of course. Whether it goes all the way to sex or not just depends on whether she's ready and whether I'm ready. It's not rocket science dude. Or maybe it's just a female friend and even though it looks romantic, I know her and I can read her body language and I can tell she didn't mean it that way. No worries.

 

Again... different people have different views. You think this way, ok. But does the guy think this way? Men and women think differently, we all know that. So if you care, you would stay clear of the areas that may misrepresent you, from the guy's perspective. Just like if the guy cares, he would stay away from areas that may offend the woman, even though he doesn't think it's a big deal.

 

It's about who's in control. The man has the advantage, he does things his way, he could care less what the woman thinks. If the woman has the advantage, she would do things her way, and could care less what the man thinks. Too f-ing bad, you don't like it, you can leave. That's the attitude. And sometimes, the recipient will do exactly that -- leave.

 

I've bailed on women before just as women have bailed on me. I have had sex with women that I didn't even bother watching DVDs with. And I have failed to have sex with women that I spent money to wine and dine. I have started relationships with women before I had sex with them, and I have had sex with women that I never started relationships with. There are all kinds of situations out there. Every situation is different. It's a giant game.

It's a game to some, but only if you are dating a game player and you participate in the games. It's about owning your own feelings and issues, and reserving the right to remove yourself from a situation if you so choose. Simple.

 

Do what you think is right, but be aware of the consequences. In this case, maybe the wrong signal would be sent, maybe it won't. It's the OP's decision, and she has to guess what the man is going to think, if she cares.

There's a lot more to signals than what, when, and where. If the guy can't read the situation properly that's his problem. It's not like she's inviting him over for dinner, movies, naked hot tubbing, a lingerie show, and then saying she doesn't want to sleep with him.

 

All she asked was how to have this date without sending the wrong signal. Straight forward question, really.

 

But this thread is turning into a giant fight for fighting's sake.

VV is the only poster I see who is causing that.

[donnamaybe]

LOL, I already said I'm out

Really?

I'm putting you on my ignore list.

Oh, goody!

 

Have a good day.

I plan to, thanks!

[donnamaybe]

There's a lot more to signals than what, when, and where. If the guy can't read the situation properly that's his problem. It's not like she's inviting him over for dinner, movies, naked hot tubbing, a lingerie show, and then saying she doesn't want to sleep with him.

 

All she asked was how to have this date without sending the wrong signal. Straight forward question, really.

 

VV is the only poster I see who is causing that.

 

Yes, yes, and yes to everything you said here! Great post!!!

[climbergirl]

Why not? Women usually won't say, hey come over and have sex. They always say other things. And if you take what they say at face value and don't put the moves on them, then they get all offended and think you're weak and too scared to make a move. Think for a second from the guy's perspective... we CAN'T tell the difference.

 

Again... different people have different views. You think this way, ok. But does the guy think this way? Men and women think differently, we all know that. So if you care, you would stay clear of the areas that may misrepresent you, from the guy's perspective. Just like if the guy cares, he would stay away from areas that may offend the woman, even though he doesn't think it's a big deal.

 

It's about who's in control. The man has the advantage, he does things his way, he could care less what the woman thinks. If the woman has the advantage, she would do things her way, and could care less what the man thinks. Too f-ing bad, you don't like it, you can leave. That's the attitude. And sometimes, the recipient will do exactly that -- leave.

 

I've bailed on women before just as women have bailed on me. I have had sex with women that I didn't even bother watching DVDs with. And I have failed to have sex with women that I spent money to wine and dine. I have started relationships with women before I had sex with them, and I have had sex with women that I never started relationships with. There are all kinds of situations out there. Every situation is different. It's a giant game.

 

Do what you think is right, but be aware of the consequences. In this case, maybe the wrong signal would be sent, maybe it won't. It's the OP's decision, and she has to guess what the man is going to think, if she cares.

 

But this thread is turning into a giant fight for fighting's sake.

 

I don't agree that it's a game...but I do agree that it's situational. What makes a person think that inviting one over for dinner and a movie is a game? Again, if the vibe is out there to have sex then I can see where a man could be confused, but OP seems very intent on not letting that happen. In that scenario the absence of expected 'consequences' falls on whoever is assuming.

 

This is not unlike a situation where a man pays for the first date and assuming that the return will be sex. If this would be his motivation, then that speaks way more about him than her accepting.

[Phateless]

Yes, yes, and yes to everything you said here! Great post!!!

 

Thanks Donna!

[A O]

I'm not going to go searching for it. If you don't see what I mean it's not worth arguing with you.

That quote wasn't for you btw.

 

Guidance and instruction are different. If she didn't ask vv to tell her what to do it's not his place to tell her how to run her life.

I'll have another look in the morning to see if he's telling her how to run her life. Haven't immediately picked up on that as yet.

So, I've had another look (I think I've posted more than the other fellow now!) Found one instance where 'vv' suggests to the OP how she should behave - "Perhaps it's time to start behaving like mature adults in their 30's, not middle schoolers?"

 

Found between 3-5 other occasions where he advocates that the OP be more honest with her behavior. Can't fault advocating honesty as far as I'm concerned. Nothing else amongst his several posts amounts to telling the OP how to run her life.

 

If you'd care to theorize on that, you're more than welcome to do a search and read my other threads/posts to do your own character analysis. Knock yourself out.

There's more than enough evidence here. On the one hand you believe that people can do whatever they want, and that folk here, don't need to listen to the likes of myself and 'vv'. On the other hand, you're not shy in telling is how we should behave. You bemoan the behavior of others, and yet exert the same behavior in return.

 

Yes, behavior - she's an interesting subject for sure.

 

 

.

[A O]

But you and VV are just fine and dandy with interpreting (or should I say MISinterpreting) things the OP says.

Point it out the misrepresentations please. Let’s get some justification behind a lot of these comments of yours shall we. Speaking of which, I'm still waiting for the text that supports your belief that having a guy over for dinner and dvd watching equates to full-on sexual intercourse. That it means sex in the eyes of ‘vv’ as opposed to what he actually alluded to, that being its an indicator, a signal that sex may take place. Let’s clear this misrepresentation up while we’re at it shall we.

 

Well, but that's exactly the point. I don't understand why people like VV and A_O are giving her a hard time for ASKING THE QUESTION

I’m not giving anyone a hard time – can’t be bothered with that. Will say though, that I’m speaking on behalf on the forgotten party in all this – the guy she’s dating. I’m speaking on behalf of the people who’ve been there, may see themselves heading there or are perhaps in a similar situation already. The folk that come across a dater who acts all interested, but isn’t really. The type with poor dating histories. How do we spot them, do they even exist, what can we do about them or how can we avoid them altogether, if possible. Being supportive of an OP is all well n good, but in the course of this interaction, if certain views or behavior reveal themselves, then they may will be examined – that’s human nature. We can only hope that said examination is done respectfully and for the most part, that has been the case here.

 

 

.

[Phateless]

That quote wasn't for you btw.

 

So, I've had another look (I think I've posted more than the other fellow now!) Found one instance where 'vv' suggests to the OP how she should behave - "Perhaps it's time to start behaving like mature adults in their 30's, not middle schoolers?"

 

Found between 3-5 other occasions where he advocates that the OP be more honest with her behavior. Can't fault advocating honesty as far as I'm concerned. Nothing else amongst his several posts amounts to telling the OP how to run her life.

 

There's more than enough evidence here. On the one hand you believe that people can do whatever they want, and that folk here, don't need to listen to the likes of myself and 'vv'. On the other hand, you're not shy in telling is how we should behave. You bemoan the behavior of others, and yet exert the same behavior in return.

 

Yes, behavior - she's an interesting subject for sure.

 

 

.

 

Are you really interested in debating semantics? This is so far off-topic. Ok fine. Yes, people can do whatever they want and if VV feels the need to nitpick SAC's post, that's his prerogative, but it's not productive.

 

I just don't see why he would get on her case about this so much. Anyway, I'm done explaining myself. If you don't understand by now what I was getting at there's no use in trying to explain it further.

 

Good day to you.

[A O]

It's a game to some, but only if you are dating a game player and you participate in the games. It's about owning your own feelings and issues, and reserving the right to remove yourself from a situation if you so choose. Simple.

Fantastic. Simple, but hard to learn or teach! You're well informed, but not everyone is like this unfortunately. So, while you support the OP, I'll support those who are a lot less savvy than you.

 

There's a lot more to signals than what, when, and where. If the guy can't read the situation properly that's his problem. It's not like she's inviting him over for dinner, movies, naked hot tubbing, a lingerie show, and then saying she doesn't want to sleep with him..

Indeed, but there’s a lot more to it than this. She’s multi-dating. I believe that people should be upfront about this. Just a personal preference of mine of course. She’s lukewarm towards this guy yet she sends out enough signals to suggest otherwise. That’s hard to counter for some, namely the doormats of this world. She has a poor dating conversion rate, and a not-to-flash relationship history to date. She appears to have a larger aversion to most towards sex. These are all facts that don’t readily present themselves, even in the hands of experienced dating/relationship types.

 

Not everyone is as relationship savvy as many of us here and not everything is easy to flesh out. That is why ‘vv’ is big on honesty and I am, like you, big on pro-action as ways to counter the foibles of certain daters.

 

Are you really interested in debating semantics? This is so far off-topic. Ok fine. Yes, people can do whatever they want and if VV feels the need to nitpick SAC's post, that's his prerogative, but it's not productive.

Its not semantics. If you make an allegation, then you should be able to back it up. Baseless allegations are a lot less counter productive than simply airing views. The have a habit of sullying a poster or deflecting from the point at hand. Hardly semantics at all Phateless. Poor debating form actually.

 

 

.

[Phateless]

Fantastic. Simple, but hard to learn or teach! You're well informed, but not everyone is like this unfortunately. So, while you support the OP, I'll support those who are a lot less savvy than you.

 

Very true, but I think this kind of support is MORE important for the less savvy. Instead of blaming the girl for not cluing you in, you should blame yourself for not asking the question. That's my point. SAC is not at fault if dude gets hurt - dude is for not asking the question. It's not her responsibility to protect his feelings.

 

Indeed, but there’s a lot more to it than this. She’s multi-dating.

So?

 

I believe that people should be upfront about this. Just a personal preference of mine of course. She’s lukewarm towards this guy yet she sends out enough signals to suggest otherwise. That’s hard to counter for some, namely the doormats of this world. She has a poor dating conversion rate, and a not-to-flash relationship history to date. She appears to have a larger aversion to most towards sex. These are all facts that don’t readily present themselves, even in the hands of experienced dating/relationship types.

None of this has anything to do with her question, nor was she interested in discussing it. That's not your or VV's judgment call to make. The bolded part - she never said she was lukewarm. Why are you worried about protecting this guy she's dating? This is so far outside the range of what the OP was asking that it's borderline irrelevant.

 

She asked a simple question and VV start discussing all this other stuff and criticizing her on it. LAME.

 

As for multi-dating, everyone should assume that everyone else is multi-dating until you have the exclusivity talk.

 

Not everyone is as relationship savvy as many of us here and not everything is easy to flesh out. That is why ‘vv’ is big on honesty and I am, like you, big on pro-action as ways to counter the foibles of certain daters.

He's venting. It's fairly easy to spot, and it's not applicable in this thread.

 

Its not semantics. If you make an allegation, then you should be able to back it up. Baseless allegations are a lot less counter productive than simply airing views. The have a habit of sullying a poster or deflecting from the point at hand. Hardly semantics at all Phateless. Poor debating form actually.

How many baseless allegations did vv make? He's saying all this out-there stuff with no proof. Only inferences.

[zengirl]

Indeed, but there’s a lot more to it than this. She’s multi-dating.

 

What? So, as a woman, if I'm multi-dating, that means I can't invite a guy over, cook him a meal, and not have sex with them? That's all the more reason to not have sex, and I don't see how inviting a guy and cooking dinner is "acting like middle-schoolers" as vv said above at all. I never cooked a guy dinner in middle school (or high school, or college, or anytime until my adult life, actually).

 

And what's so wrong with multi-dating anyway? That's pretty normal in the beginning, until you decide to invest in someone. As long as you're not sending out huge investment signals (i.e. SLEEPING with them, to many people, unless it's been stated otherwise, or saying things that express a higher level of interest than you feel), then multi-dating is fine.

 

For the OP's original query. I, personally, wouldn't invite the guy over in this situation (mostly because it's not her house, and I find that odd), but I've had guys I was dating over to my house plenty of times before we had sex. I've cooked them meals. I've watched movies and TV shows with them. I've listened to music with them. (Heck, I've even played video and board games with them.) Not one has stormed out or given any indication he was pissed I wasn't going to sleep with him, but mostly, I tend to be upfront about my views on sex --- I wait quite awhile. Casual sex, even in the not-committed or committed-but-not-too-serious, variety interests me not at all. Most of the guys I've dated respect this and had gotten to a point in their life where they were looking more for that than casual sex anyway. I suppose it depends on the kind of fellows you date.

 

I definitely don't understand the attacks towards her. It's a valid question. Though I think we worry far too much what a new person we're dating will think; after all, if they jump to something that causes them to run away ("She invited me to her house and didn't sleep with me! What a horrible woman!"), why did we want them around in the first place? Isn't being single better than being with people who are, ultimately, unsuited for us if we have to watch our every little move.

[Phateless]

Fantastic. Simple, but hard to learn or teach! You're well informed, but not everyone is like this unfortunately. So, while you support the OP, I'll support those who are a lot less savvy than you.

 

Indeed, but there’s a lot more to it than this. She’s multi-dating. I believe that people should be upfront about this. Just a personal preference of mine of course. She’s lukewarm towards this guy yet she sends out enough signals to suggest otherwise. That’s hard to counter for some, namely the doormats of this world. She has a poor dating conversion rate, and a not-to-flash relationship history to date. She appears to have a larger aversion to most towards sex. These are all facts that don’t readily present themselves, even in the hands of experienced dating/relationship types.

 

Not everyone is as relationship savvy as many of us here and not everything is easy to flesh out. That is why ‘vv’ is big on honesty and I am, like you, big on pro-action as ways to counter the foibles of certain daters.

 

Its not semantics. If you make an allegation, then you should be able to back it up. Baseless allegations are a lot less counter productive than simply airing views. The have a habit of sullying a poster or deflecting from the point at hand. Hardly semantics at all Phateless. Poor debating form actually.

 

 

.

 

Agreed. She's not doing anything wrong by inviting this dude over. If he assumes sex that's on him, not her.

 

 

I think Phateless posted the above.

 

See if anyone can guess what is "wrong" with the reasoning espoused in the italicized part of Phateless's comment?

 

(Answer below.)

 

 

A: Effective relationships require good mutual communication.

 

 

Therefore to say something like "if he assumes....[whatever]...." it's "on" one or the other of the parties doesn't address the issue, which is: How to improve communication between the parties? If there is a breakdown in communication it is "on" both of them, because it hurts the relationship. A relationship takes two.

 

This has nothing really to do about sex per se, which is only one subject which a couple can communicate about. It can be about anything.

 

If one person or the other says "I don't care if the other person misinterprets me, or if I provide ambiguous information which causes confusion," then what is really being said is there is no real concern for having effective communications within the boundaries of a healthy relationship.

 

No one has to have sex if they don't want to, something which I've stated previously but which some have ignored. They do have an obligation to communicate their view on dating and sex as unambiguously as possible to the person their dating. This is called "being fair."

 

See, Phateless, people who are trying to be in successful relationships value effective, honest communication because it pays to minimize unnecessary misunderstandings. Otherwise things don't get done that should get done, for one thing. Time gets wasted, feelings hurt, the relationship is damaged.

 

Effective unambiguous communication is particularly important in the early phases of any relationship precisely because the two people don't know each other too well. Long time successful couples often seem as if they can almost read each other's minds on a lot of things, even completing each other's sentences and anticipating actions of the other in a given situation.

 

I'm all for effective communication. She's not sending any mixed signals. In fact the whole point of this thread is to make sure she doesn't send mixed signals. She posted because she is conscientious.

[Phateless]

Yeah I forgot to say--she should change the oil in her car every 3,000 miles.

 

Should she use synthetic or regular?

 

Mixed signals - VV, I'm sorry if you as a man would have misread that situation. Girl inviting you over for DVDs might mean sex but not necessarily. Either way she already stated she's ok with making out so WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL? Why does it even matter? It doesn't sound like she's playing with anyone's heart strings. If anything it sounds like this is bothering you a lot more than the guy you're trying to "protect."

Edited July 20, 2010 by Phateless

[Phateless]

Canola.

 

 

.......................................

 

Wasn't the original diesel engine designed to run on peanut oil?

 

EDIT - as fuel, I mean, lol. Not as lubricant.

[Star Gazer]

Do we know if this 4th-no-sex-just-movies date has happened yet?

[Phateless]

Do we know if this 4th-no-sex-just-movies date has happened yet?

 

I'm guessing the OP has given up on LS due to the response she got in this thread.

[silverfish]

Do we know if this 4th-no-sex-just-movies date has happened yet?

 

Don't know. By the time the OP gets to the end of this thread, they may well be married

[A O]

Instead of blaming the girl for not cluing you in, you should blame yourself for not asking the question. That's my point. SAC is not at fault if dude gets hurt - dude is for not asking the question. It's not her responsibility to protect his feelings.

I'm not playing the blame game. I'm simply highlighting what certain behaviors may mean. And while you're right, we're not responsible for how others feel (funny that, in the context of some of the responses within this thread), not presenting the full picture, being economical with the truth, especially if you hold a view that runs counter the the norm, isn't the most responsible behavior around either. For example, we know that most women want relationships, hopefully, of the long-term, meaningful variety. Some men are known to want everything but the long-term component of a relationship. In this situation, I believe that men should be upfront with this belief, to help avoid confusion and misunderstanding, especially further down the line when feelings are well n truly developed.

 

In short, if you have views or beliefs that run counter to the established norm, I think that you have a degree of responsibility to make these known. In relation to the OP, sex is not a happening thing with her anytime soon. She needs some form of reassurance over and above the typical norm it appears. I don't have a problem with that but I suggest that she be a little more upfront about this, if no other reason than to avoid possible confusion. Matter of fact, she should get into the habit of being more upfront about her feelings in general, if for no other reason than to limit confusion. Confusion after all is the result of poor communication more often than not. Having said all that, I understand that its far from easy for some people to be so open, honest and direct. But, something to keep in mind nonetheless.

 

None of this has anything to do with her question, nor was she interested in discussing it. That's not your or VV's judgment call to make.

Here you go again, telling us how to behave. Sorry, but this is not your decision to make. Once you put your views out there - they're open for one and all. And as long as we both keep within the theme of what's been discussed and do so in a respectful manner, then that's all we can or should ask for.

 

The bolded part - she never said she was lukewarm.

Blind Freddy, or shall we say, the more relationship experienced among us, can see that her behavior, her interest level in this guy, isn't up to the levels that it'll suggest that something meaningful, for them both, is likely to take place here. Her overall dating and relationship history further bears this out.

 

Why are you worried about protecting this guy she's dating? This is so far outside the range of what the OP was asking that it's borderline irrelevant.

I'm not worried about protecting men. I will speak for the unspoken, I will point things out for the less well informed, I will educate, where practical, that much is true.

 

As for multi-dating, everyone should assume that everyone else is multi-dating until you have the exclusivity talk.

Absolutely not, but then I'm old-fashioned. One of the first questions anyone with half a brain should ask. And thinking like yours and the OP's is the reason why.

 

He's venting. It's fairly easy to spot, and it's not applicable in this thread.

Do you wish to try and justify this latest allegation? So damn easy around here to make accusations around here, near impossible for some - to back them up.

 

How many baseless allegations did vv make? He's saying all this out-there stuff with no proof. Only inferences.

Feel free to counter - that's always been an option here. Attack the message instead of the messenger for change.

 

 

.

[A O]

What? So, as a woman, if I'm multi-dating, that means I can't invite a guy over, cook him a meal, and not have sex with them?

You can do whatever you want. I'm simply expressing my personal preference. If you're in the multi-dating camp, and the 'lets all date others without telling any of em while we're at it' brigade, then yeah, my views would seem quite absurd.

 

And what's so wrong with multi-dating anyway? That's pretty normal in the beginning, until you decide to invest in someone

I'm showing my age. Multi-dating didn't exist back in my day. The OP, apparently is a traditional soul like me too, or so we're led to believe. From my perspective, I know what I want in a partner. I compare and judge everything I see before me according to my own set of criteria. Multi-dating, to me, judges people off against each other moreso, if not instead of, what we should think is important to each one of us. Not revealing certain dating behaviors - hey I'm dating others, you OK with that - doesn't come across to me as a person with good communication skill either. But hey, that's just how I see things.

 

I definitely don't understand the attacks towards her. It's a valid question.

It is a valid question, but so is questioning a lot of information that presents itself thereafter also.

 

.

[Crenshaw]

So, what happened on the date?!

 

(I quit lurking and registered to ask this question!)