Quote:
Originally Posted by meeera
You might need to read, listen, and learn what many women go through when they say things like this to some men who have initiated and then persisted in attempting contact despite their clear lack of interest. A grunt followed by going back to your solo activity is a clear lack of interest.
|
I have no problems understanding when someone is not interested in talking. But I also understand that there are some perfectly nice people who can't. Quite frankly: if a grunt followed by going back to your solo activity was a clear and universal sign of lack of interest, we wouldn't be having this conversation. We have
words that give clear meaning. We should use them instead of "signals" that are never as clear as the signal-giver believes them to be.
My willingness to talk (or understand someone doesn't want to talk) is unaffected by someone's gender or physical features. I'd appreciate it if you'd stop implying that I need some sort of education about interacting with certain groups of people. I've never harassed anyone in my life.
Quote:
|
I realise you think you're a Nice Guy, but at that point, to the other person you are a Schrodinger's box. They have no idea whether your next response is going to be "very sorry, I'll leave you alone", or a string of stuff that I'm pretty sure I can't write here.
|
I don't
think I'm a nice guy. I
know it. The "other person" you're referring to doesn't exist. Because I'm fairly adept at reading "signals." That doesn't mean I can't point out (and lament the fact) that "signals" are the least effective form of communication out there. A man (and I use that term loosely) who would spew invective at someone for asking them politely to leave them alone is very likely to behave similarly to someone who grunts at them and ignores them. A pig is a pig.