And then it gives specific examples and attempts to make universal rules out of them. That's where I disagree, with the universal rules. If she had said this is USUALLY the case, I would not take issue, but she says this is ALWAYS the case.
Yes, it is always the case that you should pay attention to the cues of those around you. That's always the case, and that's what the article says. Then she gives you examples. Of course those examples are not universal-they're specifically about public transportation! Also, she refines those examples in the comments, when people ask her questions.
Again you trying to present the article and comments as representative of all women.... As if they hadn't been selected by being on a specific article on specific website. I object to this. I also do not appreciate you telling me what I care how.
Okay, this was worded poorly. You had a chance to find out what many, many women thought. Not all of them. But there was surprising unity regarding polite behavior. You had a chance to find out what many, many women thought and rejected it because those women were not every woman? Were feminists? Why?
The point about women warming up--legitimately warming up. You only addressed that with the assumption that the warming up was a ruse, this is not sufficient because you should take me at my word for the sake of any open and honest discussion.
I didn't dismiss that possibility. I asked you to consider something you hadn't considered before, that SOME of those women MIGHT have been faking it.
Do you see the irony of telling me I should take you at your word about women warming up legitimately when you refuse to take the women on the other website at THEIR word?
Let's say that everyone in your sample has genuinely warmed up. What's your sample size? Is it large enough to allow you to dismiss what other women say about themselves?
Like I said, I don't ride the bus, maybe that's my problem. The article was only about approaches on a bus, all women ride buses after all.
No, it's not because all women ride buses. It's an example of a time when many women who do ride public transportation would like to be left alone but find that many men won't leave them alone.
I brought up Leo in regard to YOUR point, not the authors. Specifically your point about the earphones. I think that many women would be happy if the real Leo approached them even if they had earplugs in (let's say they didn't see him and so did not take the plugs out). Not all women, but many would be happy. Thus, I was trying to disprove the absolute do not approach under any circumstances if they have earplugs in position I read you as taking.
Yes, fine...and then, when you see the reaction to your intrusion, you have another choice to make. Yours has apparently been to keep talking to them, even when they indicate they don't want you to. That was the whole darned point of your post! My point is that that's rude, that lots of women think it's more than rude, and that now that you know lots of women think it's rude or even more than rude, what are you going to do in the future?
At this point I want to say that I dont think you are really having a conversation with me, you are lecturing at me. I am actually interested in a discussion on this topic. If you are not, then we can end this.
Okay, I will try not to be lecturey. I'm lecturey because I am frustrated. Know why I'm frustrated? Because all this is covered in the 1000 comments, by the women themselves, and if you'd bothered to read it I wouldn't have to paraphrase or parse them for you.
Well at least I finally got you to admit not all women are the same. So now can you admit that certain body language cues will be different among different women and for different reasons?
In some places nodding doesn't mean yes, and shaking your head doesn't mean no. Yet we use them in this country and expect to be generally understood. You are pretending that the existence of nuance means that you get to willfully misunderstand/ignore a woman's signals. Which, by the way, was also covered in the comments.
I didn't dismiss anything out of hand, I only took it in context (in other words, not representing all women). But clearly, because you are a woman you can speak for all women right? No problem there.
I am telling you the position of the majority of the women in the comments, because you wouldn't read them, and therefore I must be a woman?
Nah, in my experience it never goes cold to bitchy (and I would never call direct bitchy), but thanks for making huge assumptions about me, it helps this open and honest discussion. If a girls is bitchy it starts out that way. Let's give an example:
Me: Hi
Her: You're really skinny/fat/short/bald!! hahaha (Laughs with friend)
Me: Thanks
, (continues with a normal/fun interaction and everyone wins)
Methinks you are moving the goalposts. In this scenario, she is clearly interacting. How is this anything like talking to a woman reading with earbuds in, not engaging with you? Also, perhaps it is not best to call hypothetical women "bitchy" when talking about women's issues. Are you talking about one real woman of your acquaintance who once said something "bitchy" but then talked and laughed with you? Or, as your original post implied, are you talking about a subsection of women who "warm up" after a man doesn't leave them alone because of "bitchiness"?
Criticizing woo makes people uncomfortable, but that's what JREF does. I am not harming someone by saying hi to them, even if they have earplugs in. You like gems, don't you?
The people who believe in woo who come here engage of their own free will and volition. They choose to engage. Your analogy doesn't work at all; what you are talking about is more like going to the church and interrupting silent prayer to ask people why they believe this stupid stuff, anyway? Or waiting outside and asking each one that question as they leave the church.
In this hypothetical scenario I risk annoying 9 women for a few minutes each, so that 1 woman can meet someone they like. It's not about only about me..it's also about that 1 girl. So that math is that 9 lose and 2 gain. Is the gain of the two worth the loss of the 9? I just made up the 9/10, but if 9/10 is too high, when does it become okay? 5/10, 1/10, 1/100? Never?
No, in this hypothetical scenario you approach woman after woman, knowing that the vast majority don't want to talk to you, and that some percentage of these women are actually nervous of you, because your desire to connect is more important than their desire to be left alone. That one woman, the one woman in 10 who might want to talk to you, connect with you, and marry you? That's the one who's making eye contact and smiling. Why are you bothering the other nine, who aren't doing those things?
I like bitchy girls, because one they warm up to you they aren't bitchy anymore---not to you anyway. But apparently you and I have different definitions of bitchy even though you are trying to use it as my word.
I think it's a word that's easy to use when you can't think of a better word, and the person you're talking about is a woman. But what does it mean? Nothing except "that woman did something I didn't like."
Why are all these scenarios on buses? What's with your extensive use of the word "bitchiness" when I clearly explained how I used the term? Why are you giving me scenarios to think about when you haven't thought about what I have presented?
The original example was on public transportation. I personally think that public transportation was originally used because it is a place where strangers gather, where they can't really get away from each other, and where the author had a lot of men try to hit on her who did not respect her body language, her answers, or her wishes.
Now tell me whether you would keep talking to the man who glared at you. The big one, with the muscles.
