Dating can be tough. It can be especially tough if your personality is a mixture of petulance and insecurity. And even tougher if you think you can argue someone who’s not interested in you into a second date with an angry, accusatory, sometimes hilarious, sometimes deeply unsettling 1600-word email. And no, I’m not speaking hypothetically here.
The email in question, written by a young investment banker named Mike to an unfortunate woman named Lauren after one less-than-great date, was posted on Reddit a couple of days ago, and has already gotten a lot of internetty attention, but some of you may not have seen it, so I thought I’d give it a little fisking anyway. Settle in; it’s going to be a long and bumpy ride. (Note: What follows below is most of the email; I’ve cut out a few passages here and there.)
Hi Lauren,
I’m disappointed in you. I’m disappointed that I haven’t gotten a response to my voicemail and text messages.
Well, we’re off to a not-so-good start. Perhaps she is, as they say, just not that into you?
FYI, I suggest that you keep in mind that emails sound more impersonal, harsher, and are easier to misinterpret than in-person or phone communication. After all, people can’t see someone’s body language or tone of voice in an email. I’m not trying to be harsh, patronizing, or insulting in this email. I’m honest and direct by nature, and I’m going to be that way in this email.
Gosh, I wonder why Lauren didn’t get back to him.
By the way, I did a google search, so that’s how I came across your email.
Google-stalking – always a nice touch. There’s no better way to charm a nice lady than by tracking down her personal information online.
I assume that you no longer want to go out with me. (If you do want to go out with me, then you should let me know.) I suggest that you make a sincere apology to me for giving me mixed signals. I feel led on by you.
Uh, what? She’s ignoring you, dude. She doesn’t want to go out with you. Seems to me she’s sending you a pretty unmixed message here.
Should she have responded to your voicemail and/or texts? In an ideal world, perhaps, but she may have sensed that you’d react precisely how you’re reacting now, and didn’t want to have anything more to do with your creepy, entitled bullshit.
And now Mike the banker makes his, er, “case” for why she should go on a second date with him:
Things that happened during our date include, but are not limited to, the following:
-You played with your hair a lot. A woman playing with her hair is a common sign of flirtation. You can even do a google search on it. When a woman plays with her hair, she is preening. I’ve never had a date where a woman played with her hair as much as you did. In addition, it didn’t look like you were playing with your hair out of nervousness.
You were flirting!! Hair-twirling = sex! If you don’t realize it you can google search it!!!
-We had lots of eye contact during our date. On a per-minute basis, I’ve never had as much eye contact during a date as I did with you.
Eye contact is an Indicator of Interest. IOI! IOI! If you didn’t want to bear my children why did you look at me, with your eyes????
-You said, “It was nice to meet you.” at the end of our date. A woman could say this statement as a way to show that she isn’t interested in seeing a man again or she could mean what she said–that it was nice to meet you. The statement, by itself, is inconclusive.
Well, not really. This is what people say to be polite at the end of a disappointing date, when they don’t want to see you again. If she wanted to see you again, she would have said something about making plans for a second date.
-We had a nice conversation over dinner. I don’t think I’m being delusional in saying this statement.
We had a conversation! You did not flee in horror! Therefore you must have my babies!!!
In my opinion, leading someone on (i.e., giving mixed signals) is impolite and immature. It’s bad to do that.
And sending someone who clearly wants nothing to do with you a long, creepy, accusatory tirade is polite?
Normally, I would not be asking for information if a woman and I don’t go out again after a first date. However, in our case, I’m curious because I think our date went well and that there is a lot of potential for a serious relationship.
Dude, you do understand that she has to actually like you too in order for there to be a relationship?
I think we should go out on a second date. In my opinion, our first date was good enough to lead to a second date.
You cannot argue someone into a second date! That’s not how it works.
Why am I writing you? Well, hopefully, we will go out again. Even if we don’t, I gain utility from expressing my thoughts to you.
Gain utility? Really? DATING IS NOT MICROECONOMICS!
In addition, even if you don’t want to go out again, I would like to get feedback as to why you wouldn’t want to go again. Normally, I wouldn’t ask a woman for this type of feedback after a first date, but this is an exception given I think we have a lot of potential.
Well, banker dude. You’re getting some feedback now. All over the internet.
If you don’t want to go again, then apparently you didn’t think our first date was good enough to lead to a second date. Dating or a relationship is not a Hollywood movie. It’s good to keep that in mind. In general, I thought the date went well and was expecting that we would go out on a second date.
So your argument is that she should go out with you, even though she doesn’t want to go out with you, because life isn’t perfect and you’re probably the best she really deserves?
Way to sell yourself, dude.
If you’re not interested in going out again, then I would have preferred if you hadn’t given those mixed signals. I feel led on.
Well, she’s not really responsible for you thinking that every woman who twirls her hair in your presence wants to have your babies.
We have a number of things in common.
Oh dear, sounds like we’ve got another “logical” argument coming up here.
I’ll name a few things: First, we’ve both very intelligent. Second, we both like classical music so much that we go to classical music performances by ourselves. In fact, the number one interest that I would want to have in common with a woman with whom I’m in a relationship is a liking of classical music. I wouldn’t be seriously involved with a woman if she didn’t like classical music. You said that you’re planning to go the NY Philharmonic more often in the future. As I said, I go to the NY Philharmonic often. You’re very busy. It would be very convenient for you to date me because we have the same interests. We already go to classical music performances by ourselves. If we go to classical music performances together, it wouldn’t take any significant additional time on your part.
Um, what?
I have no clever remark to make here, other than that Lauren is probably going to have to avoid going to the Philharmonic ever again, on the off chance she might run into banker Mike.
According to the internet, you’re 33 or 32, so, at least from my point of view, we’re a good match in terms of age.
YOU ARE RIGHT AGE. INTERNET SAYS SO. THEREFORE YOU MUST DATE ME.
I could name more things that we have in common, but I’ll stop here. I don’t understand why you apparently don’t want to go out with me again. We have numerous things in common.
Also, you both require oxygen to live. Lauren, can’t you see that you and banker Mike are soulmates?
I assume that you find me physically attractive. If you didn’t find me physically attractive, then it would have been irrational for you to go out with me in the first place. After all, our first date was not a blind date. You already knew what I looked like before our date.
Banker Mike: You said you wanted feedback. Here is some feedback. She was apparently not horrified by your physical appearance. It may be your horrible personality that needs some work.
Perhaps, you’re unimpressed that I manage my family’s investments and my own investments. Perhaps, you don’t think I have a “real” job. Well, I’ve done very well as an investment manager. I’ve made my parents several millions of dollars. That’s real money. That’s not monopoly money. In my opinion, if I make real money, it’s a real job. Donald Trump’s children work for his company. Do they have “real” jobs? I think so. George Soros’s sons help manage their family investments. Do they have “real” jobs? I think so.
You’re fighting a losing battle here, dude. Just as you cannot argue someone into liking you, you cannot argue someone into being impressed that you manage your parents’ money.
In addition, I’m both a right-brain and left-brain man, given that I’m both an investment manager and a philosopher/writer.
And I’m the Queen of Denmark.
That’s a unique characteristic; most people aren’t like that. I’ve never been as disappointed and sad about having difficulty about getting a second date as I am with you.
Oy. As if this email wasn’t stalkerish enough already.
I’ve gone out with a lot of women in my life. (FYI, I’m not a serial dater. Sometimes, I’ve only gone out with a woman for one date.)
This last bit I have no trouble believing.
I suggest that we continue to go out and see what happens.
I suspect that Lauren has already played out various scenarios in her head already, and that none of them end well.
Needless to say, I find you less appealing now (given that you haven’t returned my messages) than I did at our first date. However, I would be willing to go out with you again. I’m open minded and flexible and am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. I wish you would give me the benefit of the doubt too.
So now you’re being noble and “open minded” for trying to pressure a woman who wants nothing to do with you into a second date?
If you don’t want to go out again, in my opinion, you would be making a big mistake, perhaps one of the biggest mistakes in your life.
Now you’re just making my skin crawl.
I spent time, effort, and money meeting you for dinner. Getting back to me in response to my messages would have been a reasonable thing for you to do. In addition, you arrived about 30 minutes late for our date. I’m sure you wouldn’t like it if a man showed up thirty minutes late for a first date with you.
Here’s a solution, dude: How about she never goes on another date with you, ever. Then you won’t ever have to worry about her being late ever again.
If you’re concerned that you will hurt my feelings by providing specific information about why you don’t want to go with me again, well, my feeling are already hurt. I’m sad and disappointed about this situation. If you give information, at least I can understand the situation better. I might even learn something that is beneficial.
I hope you find the feedback that the internet has now provided you to be helpful.
If you don’t want to go out again, that I request that you call me and make a sincere apology for leading me on (i.e., giving me mixed signals).
Now we’re back on this again.
In my opinion, you shouldn’t act that way toward a man and then not go out with him again. It’s bad to play with your hair so much and make so much eye contact if you’re not interested in going out with me again.
Damn you, foul strumpet, and your devious hair-playing ways! Google it! GOOGLE IT!!!
I would like to talk to you on the phone.
I think you’ve pretty much guaranteed that this will never, ever happen.
Even if you don’t want to go out again, I would appreciate it if you give me the courtesy of calling me and talking to me. Yes, you might say things that hurt me, but my feelings are already hurt. Sending me an email response (instead of talking on the phone) would better than no response at all, but I think it would be better to talk on the phone. Email communication has too much potential for misinterpretation, etc.
Not much to misinterpret here, Mike. You’ve made it absolutely crystal clear that you’re an undateable creep.
Let me be serious for a moment. Forget about Lauren. Hell, forget about women in general for a while, and work on yourself. Get some therapy; you can afford it. Work through your bitterness, your petulance, your highly unattractive mixture of entitlement and insecurity. Stop being a “Nice Guy” and learn to be genuinely nice.
And don’t ever, ever, ever write another email like this one.
I totally agree that a very large range of experiences in terms of number of partners is normal and awesome and etc. What I specifically object to is some of the language being used. In particular, the “omg you’re so unusual!” comment to Ozy raised my eyebrows.
okay sooo not that it matters at all but by age 21 i probably racked up somewhere around 10 partners but now at 26 probably only 3 or 4 since. I haven’t been in a relationship since high school. I don’t keep strict numbers sorry. but for me personally i got over the hook up stage pretty fast. why does this matter at all though? but yeah i barely ever have sex but my “number” is still somewhere between 10-15. so if someone has a certain number by a certain age it doesn’t mean that it will continue throughout their life. seriously why does anyone care anyways?
this seems appropriate rghit now. i refus to explain myself.
Wow, this guy sounds like my ex-boyfriend.
The next time that you feminists crybaby about rape, spousal abuse, domestic violence, or any other instance of hostility and brutality expressed against women, do the men of this world a favor, and just look over some of your posts right here on manboobz.com!
Even if it IS a man who commits the violent assault, even if HE is responsible for the attack (or is it a counterattack?) against the feminist, and even if he, and NOBODY ELSE is held to blame, I think that some of the posts here, showing how HATEFUL feminists can be, will remind youall of something!
Do feminists deserve being beaten, raped, or killed for their contempt for (possibly) troubled men? No, Could it become understandable, given the venom and bitterness exuded by such hateful “females”? Maybe the poor bastard (otherwise as gentle as a lamb) was simply driven over the edge!
The above is addressed to all of the feminists on this article, but especially to CassandraSays, KathleenB, SaruGoku and zhinxi. Men have feelings too!
Meller, take your rape apologetics and kindly fuck off, you disgrace to humanity.
There’s a reason we say “gentle as a lamb.” It’s because lambs don’t ever attack people. No matter how much they’re provoked. Insult a lamb, it just looks at you. Hit a lamb, it runs away. Take away its mommy, it cries but doesn’t fight. Lambs are gentle because they don’t attack people–not because they only attack people who deserve it.
(There’s probably a hilarious YouTube video disproving this but I’m talking about the archetypal lamb here, okay.)
“I only attack people who give me a reason” isn’t noble at all. It’s meaningless. Every attacker thinks they have a reason.
Sharks only attack when they have a reason. (Maybe the reason only makes sense to the shark, but hey, you should have thought harder about the shark’s feelings.) Maybe you need to start saying “gentle as a shark.”
It’s like Jesus always said: If someone slaps you on the cheek, beat, rape, and kill them.
Meller, i don’t know if you know this, but calling discussions about rape and violence against someone’s body “crybabying” is actually pretty much the definition of hateful.
Good people are good people all of the time, even when they are angry. No “gentle lamb” is going to rape or abuse because they just can’t handle a women not being meek and subservient all the time.
And yes, we know men have feelings. You go on and on about your feelings, after all, and act as if your feelings are the same as all men. However, it’s clear you don’t give a flying fuck at the moon about women’s feelings, or indeed any feelings but your own.
Decent people know that rape and abuse is never excusable, ever. Guess what that makes you?
Meller, stop making excuses for abuse. It make you look even nastier and creepier than you already are.
To those who ask:
Yes, if the FED were abolished, private banks would tend to keep 100% gold reserves on their deposits. They would be afraid of bank runs (very serious if the government doesn’t bail you out)!
There were indeed bank failures before the Fed, but only because laws prohibiting embezzlement, fraud, and counterfeiting were never properly and universally enforced. When a bank lent out gold that wasn’t theirs to lend, issued phony receipts (payable to the bearer on demand as gold) to the borrower, which could never be honored, and listed its liabilities (money put there by depositors (checkbook deposits) or by creditors (time deposits) as assets, the same laws that prohibited such tortfeasance by all other businesses should have, and could have, been enforced!
The repeated acts of FRAUD and failures to enforce long since enacted anti-fraud laws, were the reason why those banks failed, NOT the use of gold.
Theory of Money and Credit
Economic Policy-Thoughts for Today and Tomorrow–Ludwig von Mises
America’s Money Machine–Elgin Groseclose
What Has the Government done to Our Money/Case for 100 % Gold Dollar
Case Against the Fed
Mystery of Banking–Murray N. Rothbard
The Case for Gold–Ron Paul and Lew Lehrman
End the Fed–Ron Paul
Monetary Theory and the Trade Cycle–F.A. Hayek
While not a book endorsing a 100% gold standard, Hayek’s essay is a masterpiece in explaining how depreciating value of circulating money (and rise in prices), destructive as that is, really is the LEAST destructive aspects of bank/government fraud of fiat money. The price structure is inevitably badly distorted, people (including banks and gov’t) mistakenly believe that they have more money and credit than they really have,uneconomic and unsound investments are made, and the foundations of the coming depression are inevitably laid!
Economics in One Lesson
Failure of the New Economics
Inflation crisis and How to Resolve it–Henry Hazlitt
Irreplaceable refutations of the most important and influential “money-crank” inflationist of modern times, John Maynard Keynes, written in a clear and understandable style. Even more important today than when Hazlitt first wrote them in 1946, 1960, and 1972 respectively!
These are all available either onllne or at a very reasonable price at http://www.mises.org/store
There are many others, but these will do for starters.
Enjoy!!
Also, this “I don’t think anyone DESERVES rape, but like, if they’re an uppity bitch like YOU i’ll definitely defend the rapist.” has to stop. Don’t be a mealymouthed, disingenuous gasbag on TOP of just being a terrible person; that’s just pathetic.
You, DKM, think rape and abuse is an awesome punishment for women who you deem are not properly soft and fluffy. Pretending anything else at this point is simply absurd
If they keep 100% reserves, then they have nothing to invest with. Historically banks have invested too riskily when unregulated, not too conservatively.
Here I am arguing economics with a guy whose stance on rape is the ol’ Biblical “And if someone forces you to walk with them one mile, beat, rape, and kill them.”
Meller’s post is gaslighting possible justification for misogynistic violence against women (“or is it a counterattack”, “[c]ould it become understandable”, “[m]aybe the poor bastard … was simply driven over the edge”). If someone is beating, raping, or killing another person they are not as gentle as a lamb — there is no “otherwise” about it.
(Yeah, nice job of triggering victims of rape and violence with that post of yours, Dunning-Kruger Man. Real classy.)
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: beat, rape, and kill your enemy.”
-MellerJesus
Fuck discussing Meller’s crappy libertarianism. He’s doing a piss-poor job of joining the Decent Human Beings Club at this stage of the conversation, so he doesn’t get to call the shots.
Meller, you listening? Your libertarian posts are teal deers. It gives me immense pleasure to see you waste your time on off-topic garbage that I will enjoy not reading.
At dawn MellerJesus appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to MellerJesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
And MellerJesus replied: “Stoning sounds good to me–that covers beating and killing–but I’d totally understand if you rape her, too.”
Preeetty sure Meller is a 16 year old kid who just took an economics class.
You run along now, son. Sorry your mom didn’t hug you enough or whatever.
Then Peter came to MellerJesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?”
MellerJesus answered, “No, if he really pisses you off it’s understandable if you rape, beat, and kill him. I’m not saying you should or nothin’, just that I’ll totally understand he had it coming.”
Can you be a bit more precise and tell us what we said so hateful that it would excuse all the violence against women?
Be very precise about the hateful part, please. And be aware that contempt for any rape apologist piece of shit doesn’t count.
No person is responsible for their own rape, and I don’t care if they were dancing naked in the street and yelling insults at everybody.
You can’t upset a man enough to make him rape you. Asserting otherwise make you a misandrist and a misogynist piece of shit, both at the same time.
Holly I <3 you!
You can’t drive a kind, gentle person to rape by being mean to them, Meller. But thanks for illustrating the point that so many feminists have always made about rape being about anger and hatred, not sex. Do you always want to rape, or wish someone would rape, women who piss you off?
Don’t even try to pretend that that’s not what’s going on in your twisted little brain, by the way. We all noticed that your list of women who some man, not me but someone, might feel driven to do something nasty to! Was entirely composed of women who frequently call you out on your sexism.
BTW, complaining about being physically attacked isn’t crybabying, but complaining about the fact that every single woman in the world isn’t willing to change everything about herself to better fit your doll fetish? That’s crybabying.
Meller: Onca again. please explain how you go from ‘hitting is wrong, all the time, no exceptions’ to ‘if you keep pushing men, no one can blame them if they lash out.’Two mutually incompatible ideas that you claim to hold in your head at once – the cognitive dissonance must start to hurt after awhile.
Aughh, Once, not Onca. Y i no type gud?