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.
Hitting everyone all the time should be the default, and it should be up to everyone else to convince you not to hit them! Because that sounds like a totally workable way to run a society! :p
DKM [email protected]:
“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!”
What is so difficult about this, DKM? You keep on and on making up excuses for rapists and abusers.
“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!”
That’s rich considering the hatefulness of some of the MRA websites. You know, stuff like offering rewards for personal information, making jokes about women with terminal illnesses, and the routine misogyny and evincing the desire to hurt and even kill those who disagree with you.
“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!”
Right, so you start off saying that feminists don’t deserve to be beaten raped or killed for being “mouthy” men but it’s totally understandable if they are. You’re contradicting yourself. Saying something is “understandable” in a context such as this is to justify it, but there is no justification. Also being violent is a choice, one can’t be “driven over the edge”, people don’t “just snap”, one decides to give in to violent impulses, so you’re just making excuses and that’s despicable. No amount of lip service to decent behaviour will get you if the hook when you claim that violence is “understandable” if you don’t like the victim.
“The above is addressed to all of the feminists on this article, but especially to CassandraSays, KathleenB, SaruGoku and zhinxi. Men have feelings too!”
Nobody is saying otherwise but that doesn’t justify beating the crap out of someone because you don’t like what they said.
“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)!”
Not neccessarily. The Fed is only one part of the problem. The money monopoly is a bigger one. I’ve read all those books. Have you read any of the more modern ones I’ve recommended to you yet? Even Austrian scholarship MOVES ON. We could have both full and fractional reserve banking systems and a variety of commodities and credit and paper/labor systems. Remember when I said that my problem with the Gold Standard was that it was a Standard? My main problem is that people need to be informed fully of the risks and benefits when they go for fractional or full reserve. Fractional includes greater risk but… WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF GREATER INTEREST. It’s not evil. It’s just an option that people can take in a free market.
Why do I even bother. Sometimes you believe another libertarian exists, sometimes you try to explain to me that people would need to buy the produce on my farm. At anyrate, please, please read a book published this century on the matter. I told you, not being a fan of the gold standard and being somewhat “austro-mutualist” without being sure where I stand does not mean I am not famiiar with and dont’ admire Austrian theories, which you seem to reduce to their most stereotypically absurd base, and then throw at people. Come into the 21st Century, Meller. Libertarians write BOOKS in it!
“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)!”
Also, we weren’t asking. We were making fun of you.
How to creep out the entire internet, part 2 – forward them any comment by Meller.
MELLER – “The above is addressed to all of the feminists on this article, but especially to CassandraSays, KathleenB, SaruGoku and zhinxi. Men have feelings too!”
So, okay what have I said that was so hateful that it would cause counterattack. Remember, you earlier said I did not provoke my very real abuse (But other people might have)? Have you changed your mind?
Please quote my manhating statements. Especially those that might provoke counterattack. Citations, or shut up.
“Citations, or shut up.”
+1. A lot.
Notice how, as much as all the feminists here think that you’re scum, none of us are advocating violence against you, or saying that if someone was violent towards you that would be justified? That’s a rather important difference between you and us, Meller. Decent people don’t consider violence to be justified no matter how much someone pisses them off.
You are not a decent person. The more comments you post, the clearer that becomes.
Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Unless something actually upsets you; then beat, rape, and kill.
-MellerJesus
I am in love with Holly’s brain. I want to hug it and kiss it and call it George.
The ‘best’ thing about that letter is the way he won’t shut up about how OMGSMART! he is. “I’m both a right-brain and left-brain man, given that I’m both an investment manager and a philosopher/writer.” Yeah right. I’d be ‘very interested’ to read some of his philosophy.
@DKM: Just give up man. There is no point in debating the commenters here.
They seem to lack the ability to understand your point. I get it and I don’t see the cognitive dissonance they think these two supposedly mutual excursive ideas would cause.
In a perfect world, there would be no murder, rape, assault, etc… and while that is the ideal, utopia, we will never fully snuff those crimes out. Well, as long as humans have the ability to feel emotions.
The bit about understanding why a person might kill or rape is not the same as actually approving that behavior.
To use a murder example:
A husband comes home to find his wife having sex with his best friend. Outraged, he goes into the garage, gets his shotgun and kills both of them.
Now, the wife and best friend don’t deserve to be killed, but one can understand why he might have committed such a heinous crime. The husband should have packed a bag and left the house and divorced her. However, this didn’t happen. He decided to act on those negative emotions instead.
By making the claim that you can understand the rationale and motivation behind the rape, feminists say you are “apologizing” for the rapist. This is not the case with most men saying they can “get why he did it”. We aren’t “apologizing” for it, we just can see why he MIGHT of committed the crime.
Just because I say I can understand why someone committed a crime, that doesn’t mean I approve, accept or otherwise am “apologizing” for that crime. Apparently in “feminist reality” finding out the MO of a crime somehow means you wanted that crime to happen.
Now the trolls are finally talking to each other. Let the games begin!
Popcorn, anyone? I also have mini peanut butter cups if you’re prefer something sweet.
Holly, I think you’re misrepresenting MellerJesus. He would never say “Do not judge”.
If you ever start a cult, I’m in.
Brandon, when someone says “I think rape is bad, and wouldn’t it be such a such a same if it happened to you? Since you do X, that would be understandable” it’s not the same thing as someone saying “let’s try to understand the psychological reason that lead to that act”
Meller also repeatedly said that victims of abuse should change their behavior in order to stop the abuse. (also known as “victim blaming”) When you defend him, you also defend that. Do you agree with that?
Brandon, DKM is not trying to understand rapists or abusers. I believe he’s openly stated many times that women ‘push the buttons’ of their abusers. Not ‘the abusers feel that the women are aggravating them’ no no no. He places it on the women themselves. What the hell is wrong with you?
*such a shame
So, Brandon, you’re talking about a crime of passion in a specific (though hypothetical) situation.
That’s not what Meller’s talking about. He’s talking about how it’s understandable that a man would want to beat or rape feminists. In fact, here’s what he says specifically:
Again, Meller’s not talking about an MO in a specific crime. He’s saying:
1. Feminists hate men or somehow (this is unclear?) cause men to hate them.
He’s also saying, in a roundabout way:
2. DV, assault, and rape victims are feminists, and it’s understandable that in the face of their feminism some man was unable to contain his rage and not physically lash out.
In fact, he also appears to be saying:
3. Men cannot handle divergent points of view from their own and are likely to lash out with any kind of provocation.
I’m just going to go out on a limb here and say that none of those things are true. But it makes total sense, as a non-MRA and a guy who’s jus’ sayin’, that you would agree with the wackiest MRA troll on this blog. Congratulations.
Mellerlogic – Not only do women force men to beat them up by being bitches, they also force their significant others to beat them up by saying nasty things to other, totally different men on blogs. Remember, ladies, your man is always watching, so don’t think you can get out of line just because you’re not talking to him directly. You must be respectful to all men at all times, even the batshit crazy ones on the internet, or it’s the lash for you.
May I, Holly?
15 Then the Feminists went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. 16 They sent their disciples to him along with the Keynesians.
“MellerJesus,” they said, “we know that you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of Gold in accordance with the truth. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to what they are saying.
17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax to The New World Order or not?”
18 But MellerJesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19 Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a dime and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”
21 “Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s” they replied.
Then he sputtered for a while and turned kind of white, and lo, they worried he had suffered a seizure.
But then, in between twitches he said unto them, “When Ron Paul is elected he will give us SOUND Money!!!! Truly taxation is theft and the constitution was a land grab by bankers but Ron Paul will bring us back to it! If they let him! The Fed will be abolished and Banks will be honest, but then again we cannot KNOW what will happen because NEVER IN HISTORY has a PEACEFUL bloodless (?) Revolution such as this been tried! Will the military stand for truth and justice? Will they side with Ron Paul? I DON’T KNOW AND YOU DON’T EITHER! Yes in the past banks failed, but that wasn’t Ron Paul’s fault. Sure, I want the libertarian states of America but until then, Ron Paul is the only one to give us Gold and to Gold what is Gold’s.”
22 When they heard this, they were confused. So they left him and went away.
23. But he followed and kept talking about it.
24. And talking about it and talking about it. And lo, he had a reading list.
25. And lo, someone said they had read the reading list, and yet they obviously lied, for if they had read the reading list, some of which they had found very interesting, some of which was even by one of their favorite authors, and some of it actually seeming to contradict points the MellerJesus had made, they too would sound like an overexcited, paranoid leprechaun.
26. And lo, he gave them the reading list again.
Does the fact that Meller routinely calls me out by name in his screeds mean I’m one of the cool kids now?
KathleenB – Yes. Yes it does. If you weren’t already. Which you totally were.
Aw, the old toad has vanished. Maybe he’s still busy wanking to the thought of someone – not him of course! – beating up us evil feminists.
zhinxy: W00t!
Meller: You aren’t winning points (rhetorical, nor brownie). By your logic no one (least of all you) should be at all upset about a Valerie Solanas or a Lorena Bobbitt. They were, after all provoked, the one by a system which degraded her, the other by a husband who abused her.
You think rape/abuse is perfectly acceptable; even when you say the rapist/abuser is completely at fault because he must have been driven to it.
Women, of course, aren’t driven to feminism by men who say they deserve to be enslaved, or raped, or kept as property by their husbands; denied an education and trapped in economic inability.
No, those women are merely hateful, and deserve what happens to them.