Author robertdawson Posted September 6, 2011 Author Posted September 6, 2011 Cypress25: Are you irritated at me or something? "Did it ever occur to you that maybe she really doesn't know how to play pool?" This sounds kind of that way.. Anyway, I mean I believed her, but I guess I assumed she would get up and try it anyway regardless of whether she was any good if she was interested (which she did do later). I guess I also assumed that women in a bar are in defense mode by default. Like I said, I've never been before. I just know there were a few creepy drunk guys around hitting on girls. I didn't say "here, I'll teach you" but I did say something like "well, you gotta try to get better... If you don't mind, could you answer the other questions I had? You seem like you know what the heck you're talking about and I'm interested in hearing what you think about this experience. I feel like I could learn a fair amount from it. "Obviously different women flirt differently and each situation is unique, but is there something glaringly obvious that I overlooked? Was there a certain point during this exchange that I should have gone ahead and asked for her number (e.g. after she cheered me on, after she asked about pool, etc.)? ...If so, should I have ignored that anyway and taken the risk?"
Cypress25 Posted September 6, 2011 Posted September 6, 2011 If you walk up to someone who doesn't know how to play pool and hand them a pool stick, they're not gonna know what the hell to do with it. "You gotta try to get better" is not very helpful. She had never played before, she needed some instruction. "Obviously different women flirt differently and each situation is unique, but is there something glaringly obvious that I overlooked? Was there a certain point during this exchange that I should have gone ahead and asked for her number (e.g. after she cheered me on, after she asked about pool, etc.)? ...If so, should I have ignored that anyway and taken the risk?" I think the whole situation was glaringly obvious. You could have asked for her number toward the end, when you caught her looking at you from across the bar. That was the moment that you chose to ignore her. It seems like she was giving you positive signals all night, but you kept waiting for a bigger signal. I don't know what more she could have done, aside from asking for your number.
Author robertdawson Posted September 6, 2011 Author Posted September 6, 2011 I guess that makes sense. She did get up and say she wanted to try later though..? "You could have asked for her number toward the end, when you caught her looking at you from across the bar." I guess I'm still hung up on the fact that they walked off without saying anything to me. I thought following her under the circumstances would make me look creepy or desperate. Is that not the case? Why did none of them in the group say anything to me..?I'm still scratching my head over this one part... This is the assumption (that it was creepy/desperate to follow her) I had when she was looking at me from the bar, that she was uncomfortable that I had ended up next to them. I guess I'm not too good at picking up signals. I guess the last couple times I've thought a girl has been interested and I've asked her out she has said no so I went to the other extreme and ignored some obvious things. ---- I can't imagine a girl that is not interested would walk up to a stranger and ask them to tell them how to play. She could have asked her friend or her friend's boyfriend. I guess I should have ignored every other thing I analyzed about the situation based on this alone.
Author robertdawson Posted September 9, 2011 Author Posted September 9, 2011 Um, regarding the first girl I messed up with, the one I met at the meeting... Would it be a mistake to try to re-facebook her now? Could I "patch up" what happened, show her I'm not going to hold a grudge? What's the worst she can do, ignore it?
homersheineken Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Yes, I would go to a party if I was invited as long as I wasn't expected to drink. You do realize that it is wrong to be physical with someone while they're drunk right? If they're drunk and you have sex with them that is actually something called "rape". If both of you are drunk then it is statutory rape. I don't apologize to people unless I feel I've been an ***hole to them, and I only do that when I didn't have a right to be an ***hole at the time. If someone deserves to get treated badly then no apology. On second thought, the texts I sent weren't all that douche-y to begin with, just awkward. Nevermind. Now if I had cussed her out that is a different story. You are so wrong. Rape is when you have sex with a girl who says "NO". Alcohol is irrelevent. Come on dude, you've had to hear "No means NO!" Statutory rape is when you have sex with an underage girl (varies by state). If you don't like being around people or activities with people, you will most likely not get girlfriend. Girls like social interaction. Is this for real or a troll? I haven't really followed.
visualbasicide Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Stop thinking women will think logically. They don't. They only think in woman-think. A mixture of emotions and thought. Women have a lesser intellect whose main purpose is to justify their emotion-based actions. ROFLMAO While I don't think this applies to ALL women I do think it totally describes others.
Cypress25 Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 You are so wrong. Rape is when you have sex with a girl who says "NO". Alcohol is irrelevent. Come on dude, you've had to hear "No means NO!" Actually, having sex with a drunk person is technically considered rape because an intoxicated person cannot legally consent. The reason most people don't get in trouble for it is because most people don't report it as a crime. Most people don't feel the need to call the police after drunk sex, but they could.
Author robertdawson Posted September 10, 2011 Author Posted September 10, 2011 What Cypress25 said. They probably won't call the police but you're taking sort of taking advantage of them. Anyone have answers to questions?
visualbasicide Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 very true though, you want to be something they will never forget, not something they will never remember, or worse, regret.
rafallus Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Actually, having sex with a drunk person is technically considered rape because an intoxicated person cannot legally consent. The reason most people don't get in trouble for it is because most people don't report it as a crime. Most people don't feel the need to call the police after drunk sex, but they could. What if BOTH parties are drunk? Which is much much more common scenario than one party getting other one drunk, while staying sober him/herself. I was never able to understood that part of American law. (Thankfully, I'm not American, as mentioned before.)
visualbasicide Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 What if BOTH parties are drunk? Which is much much more common scenario than one party getting other one drunk, while staying sober him/herself. I was never able to understood that part of American law. (Thankfully, I'm not American, as mentioned before.) You are still required to be accountable for your own actions regardless of what was involved in the situation. Ignorance is no excuse for the law, as they say.
rafallus Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 (edited) You are still required to be accountable for your own actions regardless of what was involved in the situation. Ignorance is no excuse for the law, as they say. No. You missed the part, where I said I'm not from US, so that law does not apply to me. I have slightly different laws to abide, and ask out of curiosity. If both parties are drunk, are they both charged, if found out? Or is it only for party that insists on pressing charges? But if initially unilateral, can charged party press charges against other one too? I found this: http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/02/25/25295/ which is rather interesting. The obvious problem with this latter account is that it allows a defendant to use inebriation to negate an element of the offense. It remains, nonetheless, the present state of the law in some American jurisdictions. For my own part, if the two parties were both so thoroughly drunk that they cannot recall clearly who initiated the sex, then I would observe that we have reasonable doubt as to who raped whom. The defendant is entitled to presumption of innocence, so in the presence of such doubt I would vote to acquit – regardless of the gender of the defendant. Edited September 10, 2011 by rafallus
Cypress25 Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 If both parties are drunk, are they both charged, if found out? Or is it only for party that insists on pressing charges? But if initially unilateral, can charged party press charges against other one too? The one who reports the crime first is the victim. No one can be charged with anything if no one pressed charges. I suppose they could both press charges against each other, and that would make for a very messy court case.
homersheineken Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 Actually, having sex with a drunk person is technically considered rape because an intoxicated person cannot legally consent. The reason most people don't get in trouble for it is because most people don't report it as a crime. Most people don't feel the need to call the police after drunk sex, but they could. You're thinking of unconscious and they can't talk or say no. Again, the intoxication isn't the deciding factor, but rather the consciousness.
Cypress25 Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 You're thinking of unconscious and they can't talk or say no. Again, the intoxication isn't the deciding factor, but rather the consciousness. The person doesn't have to be unconscious for it to be considered rape. They just have to be drunk. The reason a drunk person cannot legally consent is because they are not in the right frame of mind to make decisions. Even if they say yes, being intoxicated negates their "yes" because they don't know what they're saying yes to. It's the same logic that defines statutory rape. If the person is underage, they can't legally consent because they're not old enough to understand what they're consenting to. The theme here is taking advantage of someone who doesn't know any better. If you take advantage of someone who is too drunk or too young to know what they're doing, that's rape. Look it up, every state has their own laws about this.
Recommended Posts