From: ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com   
      
   In article <1ilzhi2.zyj6bkwittyjN%zeborah@gmail.com>,   
    zeborah@gmail.com (Zeborah) wrote:   
      
   > David Friedman  wrote:   
   >   
   > > In article <1ilytn8.tfups3n2tv1dN%zeborah@gmail.com>,   
   > >  zeborah@gmail.com (Zeborah) wrote:   
   > >   
   > > > David Harmon  wrote:   
   > > >   
   > > >    
   > > > > Do not complain when a man doesn't "take the hint."  Hints have been   
   > > > > rendered useless.  Hints do not count.   
   > > >   
   > > > The only thing that counts is if a woman(1) says yes.   
   > > >   
   > > > If she says yes, go for it for as long as she keeps saying yes.   
   > > >   
   > > > If she says anything other than an unequivocal yes, change the subject   
   > > > or walk away.   
   > >   
   > > At what point?   
   >   
   > Um, at the point where she's acknowledged your question without saying   
   > "yes".   
   >   
   > >Are you assuming that the question at that point is "can   
   > > I sleep with you?"   
   >   
   > Not in the slightest.  The question might be "Can I kiss you?"  (It   
   > might be a nonverbal question, eg leaning slowly towards her, in which   
   > case the nonverbal 'yes' is her, not leaning away, not staying still,   
   > but actively leaning to meet you.)  If she doesn't say yes then you   
   > don't kiss her, and you change the subject or walk away, as best pleases   
   > you.   
      
   Or you keep hugging her, supposing that is what she so far does approve   
   of, and after a bit repeat the question.   
      
   My impression, from less than adequate first hand data, is that these   
   questions and responses indeed usually take physical form of the sort   
   you describe rather than verbal form--that you make some action   
   signaling the desire to do something and she acts in a way that   
   encourages or discourages.   
      
   > Walking away is likely to suggest to her that you're done with the   
   > relationship, so if you're willing to wait for her to change her mind   
   > then I'd recommend you just change the subject to something neutral.   
      
   It now looks as though you are considering the other end of the   
   interaction. I was actually thinking about a situation where it is clear   
   that the other party approves of some level of romantic interaction, and   
   the question is what level is acceptable. Walking away, even changing   
   the subject, could be interpreted as "if you aren't willing to kiss   
   me/let me take your clothes off/go to bed with me then I'm not   
   interested in hugging you/kissing you/engaging in activities short of   
   intercourse," with details depending on far things have gotten.   
      
   ...   
      
   > >Or are you categorically rejecting the sort of   
   > > flirtation/courtship which proceeds through stages of increasing   
   > > intimacy, in each case with the "yes" that moves the interaction to the   
   > > next stage preceded by one or more "no"'s that may actually be "not   
   > > yet"s or "maybe"s?   
   >   
   > Not in the slightest.  After you've changed the subject or walked away,   
   > if she decides that now she does want to kiss you, then she can ask you   
   > if she can kiss you.   
   >   
   > Or do you mean a relationship where one party is always asking the   
   > questions and the other always responding with no, no, no, no, no, yes?   
   >   
   > All else being equal, I'd be uneasy with such a relationship and would   
   > recommend that the first party stop pushing to be more intimate and wait   
   > a while to see whether the second party will initiate intimacy themself.   
   > And if the second party doesn't, then I'd recommend having a talk in   
   > neutral territory about whether said second party wants said first party   
   > to keep doing the pushing, or wants to stay as they are, or wants to   
   > back off / break up.   
   >   
   > The second partner may well be quite happy and even enjoy this pattern,   
   > but if not then it's surely best for both to work it out earlier rather   
   > than later.  There's equally the possibility that the first partner   
   > doesn't enjoy the pattern in which case it's surely best for both that   
   > this be communicated.  (I've been in both situations, once in a romantic   
   > relationship, once in a platonic relationship.  Both situations suck for   
   > both parties, though one side each sucks worse than the other.   
   > Communication is a Good Thing.)   
      
   Your policy might indeed be sensible in many cases. But I'm reluctant to   
   rule out patterns of interaction that many people seem to enjoy, and   
   that seem to be common across many cultures.   
      
   One of which is indedd your "no, no, no, yes" pattern, in one variant or   
   another.   
      
   --   
    http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/   
    Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.   
    Published by Baen, paperback in bookstores now   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)