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.
MRAL,
Have you been in love/had your heart broken?
What I am about to write might not get many metaphorical upvotes from other Anti-MRAs but I think it needs saying.
When a male loses his first (and subsequent) love(s), I think it hits them harder than it does a female. This isn’t woman blaming, for the following reasons. Societal masculine norms dictate that “boys don’t talk about things like that” and certainly wouldn’t ask friends for “support”. So it gets internalised – the male can become bitter. Females have friends to hug and can be more emotional. To a very limited degree, I agree with an MRA point – that men showing their emotions feel “shamed” but where I disagree with the MRA point (and what is also incredibly honest) is that it is *males* who shame males for being emotional – not (usually) females.
The thing to do is to learn from your mistakes and realise that happiness isn’t provided by another person – though a relationship can provide a huge amount of happiness.
MRAL, I really don’t think you’re a lost cause – I just think you’ve not had the feedback from females that you wanted/thought you were due. And you’ve gotten involved with some vile individuals who exploit your latent bitterness.
It isn’t too late.
MRAL, nice way to show how empathetic you are. You really meant “pathetic,” right? That I would believe, ya big creep.
I’m sure the guy is a fucked-up Asperger. These guys have no social skills and cannot understand body language. And when they are fucked up, they believe they are entitled to women. There’s a lot of guys like that that try to become PUAs because PUA seduction technique is like an algorithm. Of course these guys fail and they become even more angry against women. George Sodini probably had Asperger. The idea that a woman twirling her air is interested in you directly comes from PUA ideas :
http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0&hl=en#hl=en&safe=off&complete=0&site=webhp&q=twirling+hair+pua&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=32c8e0486eb07966&biw=1920&bih=914
The guy probably read everything on the web about PUA techniques and he tried to apply what he read.
You know, MRAL, Chris Martin (from Coldplay) was a virgin till he was 21. And he’s a famous musician for crying out loud! There’s hope for everyone!
And can you blame Chris Martin? The way British females are nowadays… he probably voluntarily held out for as long as he could before ultimately succumbing to his libido…
Yeah, women like sex now, and they never used to! It’s totes gross! British hoores!
Seriously Whatever, everyone already knows that you think women having the sex with people they choose, especially several people, is icky. We also know that you think everyone should agree, since you express total shock that we don’t. What, you guys don’t hate the sluts? But… but they’re the sluts! Everyone hates them! Hating sluts is normal and so you should all change your opinions to be normal! This is how a discussion works!
Ullere: Presumably this woman in question posted the email online without Mikes wishes,
To which I say that’s the risk one takes. Correspondence belongs to the recipient. If they wish to publish it they can (barring some other contractual, or legal restriction).
I’ve never been one who thinks e-mail is some sooper-secret form of communication which requires the other party’s permission to share. No, I won’t read your e-mail if you leave the it open, any more than I will read your letters if yoy leave them lying about the house.
But if someone chooses to publish them, that’s their perogative.
Since this was a completely unsolicited communication, I might go so far as to say it was spam, and something of a public document in the first place. Certainly his lack of respect for that aspect of her privacy doesn’t entitle him to any greater deal of respect for his feelings than he showed to hers with his seeking out information she chose not to share.
I think it’s very revealing – and commendable – that even after posting days of what even the most generous-minded observer would have to describe as vile, pig-ignorant shit, MRAL still gets plenty of sympathy from people who normally disagree with virtually every word he writes.
And most of this sympathy is coming from women.
Now doesn’t that, in itself, rather comprehensively contradict his seemingly core belief that women are all ARROGANT FUCK BITCHES FUCK GASHES FUCK CUNTS?
And when / where did I state that I find it disgusting for women to have sex? Obviously, I don’t because I’d be asexual then or homosexual (I personally know gay guys who find women physically repulsive), but I am most assuredly heterosexual. And I don’t even abhor women with multiple sexual partners, so long as they’re not “playing” any of the guys so to speak and it’s not unhealthily excessive (which also applies to any other area in life anyway). Has anyone on this board ever heard of “Moderation”?
MRAL has. And he didn’t seem very happy about it.
I was thinking of when you said that women who have more sex are worse people, and then, when we didn’t agree, acted astonished instead of actually putting forward any arguments. But thinking back, I think you might have said that people who have more sex are worse people, do while that’s totally wrong I did mischaracterize you unfairly when I said it was just women. So, pray: what is actually yucky about British women?
I have no idea why my iPhone has started autocorrecting “so” into “do” all the time. So is a word! Why are you making me look bad?
I’m sorry, no more mr nice guy, but could we not bring the autism spectrum into it? Please? I am raising an autistic child. Having no social skills is not the equivalent of being an jackass. My son has poor social skills; he continues to be friendly and nice even when people are pissed at him. And to diagnose someone with an ASD, that person needs to meet quite a bit more criteria than treating dating like a computer game or having entitlement issues. We don’t need to pathologize every objectionable behavior. Some people are just assholes, and it’s not a medical issue.
Let me share my best two stories of creepy people.
I use to write fanfiction in my spare time, and for a little while I had an e-mail correspondence with a guy who shared the same fave character from a series and also wrote fanfiction. Well, once, we were swapping fanfic ideas, and he suggested that in one of my stories, one woman should be sexually harassed and/or raped by two men but eventually fall in love with one of them. Even in my naive, barely teenage mind, that was a huge WTF moment. From a logical standpoint, the only way that kind of storyline could work is if you were talking Stockholm Syndrome, and I didn’t hate any of those characters enough to turn one into a rape victim and two into irredeemable assholes. From an emotional standpoint, I was seriously creeped out that he would even think of writing a story like that, and I stopped e-mailing him shortly after that.
The other time was when I was in a library, reading, and this one woman comes up to me and asks if I wanted to hear about her favorite book series. There was time to spare, so I figured I’d hear her out. Then she describes the first book in detail. Then the second book. Then the third. By the time she got to the fourth book, I was at my limit, so I used a softball game as an excuse to leave. Now, this wasn’t the creepy part. Long-winded and boring, sure, but not creepy. What was creepy was when she tried to follow me out of the library, pointing out exactly where the books were and practically demanding that I read them.
In these two scenarios, my description of ‘creepy’ had nothing to do with how they looked, had nothing to do their gender, had nothing to do with anybody asking me out. So, MRAL, when you try to claim that ‘creepy’ is a gendered slur, yeah, I’m not buying it at all.
So what’s particularly gross about us British ladies? I’m intrigued.
Yes, I’m married to one, so I need to know this quite urgently.
How about being British-born but raised in Canada? Does that make me more or less yucky? 😀
“And most of this sympathy is coming from women.”
– “I can always find someone
to say they sympathize.
If I wear my heart out on my sleeve.”
“Now doesn’t that, in itself, rather comprehensively contradict his seemingly core belief that women are all ARROGANT FUCK BITCHES FUCK GASHES FUCK CUNTS?”
“But I don’t want some pretty face
to tell me pretty lies.
All I want is someone to believe.
Honesty is such a lonely word.
Everyone is so untrue.
Honesty is hardly ever heard.
And mostly what I need from you. “
MRAL is getting honesty, and lots of it.
But the ball is very much in his court. If his real life persona is anywhere close to his online one (and I suspect that even if he doesn’t yell out loud about ARROGANT FUCK TALL FUCK BITCHES, he gives the impression that he might), you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to work out why he’s been less than successful with women up to now.
He’s been offered lots of excellent advice, and might actually stand a chance of improving his life if he only took some of it on board.
(AHEM)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-12-10/young-uk-women-more-promiscuous-than-men-survey/234836
Young British women are more promiscuous than their male counterparts and more likely to be unfaithful, a new survey has revealed.
The study of 2,000 women in the UK, commissioned by More magazine, found that by the age of 21, women have had an average of nine sexual partners; two more than their male partner.
It also found a quarter of young women have slept with more than 10 partners in the first five years since losing their virginity, compared with 20 per cent of young men.
“Our results show that after decades of lying back and thinking of England, today’s twenty-something women are taking control of their sex lives and getting what they want in bed,” said More magazine editor Lisa Smosarski.
The average age at which respondents lost their virginity was 16.
More than half of respondents said they were not in love with the person they lost their virginity to and only 32 per cent believed it was important to be in love with someone before they had sex with them.
But if a woman met someone she really liked, 56 per cent would make him wait “a month or more” before she would have sex with him.
Of the women surveyed, 50 per cent admitted they had cheated on a partner and half of those had been unfaithful at least twice.
Only 25 per cent said they had a partner who cheated on them. If a man did cheat, 99 per cent of young women would dump him.
Indicating the influence of Britain’s tabloid newspapers, 60 per cent of women said they would kiss and tell for 20,000 pounds ($A45,000) if they had a one-night stand with someone famous.
The survey results were released less than a fortnight after an academic study found British citizens were the most promiscuous of any large western industrial nation, while Australians ranked fifth.
– AAP
And this is a problem because…?
Young British women are more promiscuous than their male counterparts and more likely to be unfaithful, a new survey has revealed.
Of the women surveyed, 50 per cent admitted they had cheated on a partner and half of those had been unfaithful at least twice.
Only 25 per cent said they had a partner who cheated on them. If a man did cheat, 99 per cent of young women would dump him.
DON’T YOU JUST LOVE THE DOUBLE STANDARD?
Indicating the influence of Britain’s tabloid newspapers, 60 per cent of women said they would kiss and tell for 20,000 pounds ($A45,000) if they had a one-night stand with someone famous.
AND A GENTLEMAN NEVER KISSES AND TELLS … BUT A LADY DOES?!
What double standard? Do you seriously think that a survey of men wouldn’t produce identical results?
Whatever: the only bad thing you mention is that English women seem more likely to cheat. But it also says “Only 25 per cent said they had a partner who cheated on them.”
That’s not particularly helpful… as not everyone knows when they are or have been cheated on. So only 25% may know they are/have been cheated on, but that doesn’t really have much relevance when it’s being compared to the amount who obviously know they cheated since it’s themselves. Did the researchers interview men to find out how often they admitted to cheating?
Also, how did they define cheating? And did they ask the women based on a particular set definition, or did they ask without setting a solid definition, so the woman would answer in regards to her own personal definition of “cheating”.