DATING: PERILS AND PITFALLS OF AN ICY DEMEANOR VERSUS WARMTH AND FRIENDLINESS

You've probably heard about Self-made Man, the book by Norah Vincent, a woman who went undercover as a man for 18 months to see how the other half lives.  I read an excerpt from her book in the most recent People Magazine and one portion in particular struck me. (Yes, I read People Magazine rather than The Economist. So I am not a serious person.  Bite me.)

Anyway, the portion that struck me was her frustration and anger at women she tried to date when she was a man. She was angered by their icy demeanor and the power they had over her.  She apparently believes this is a common reaction among men and I suspect she may be right.  Here is how she describes it:

The first night we went to several watering holes that catered to young professionals.  As I got up to approach the bar, I could see the women I was heading for absorbed in conversation.  The female me knew that my approach, no matter how unassuming, would be perceived as a little pathetic and detestable.  I didn't want to be that nuisance guy women dread.

"Hi, ladies. (Ladies? Jesus.) Sorry to interrupt, but I wanted to meet you." The women looked me over like inferior produce, then smiled weakly.

As I talked to one woman, I found myself switching to her point of view.  Seeing how protected she seemed, I remembered my brother saying, "They only want one thing.  That's how guys are."  I had, I realized, treated most men with the same coldness that these women were showing me. 

[Norah then reveals her true identity to the women.] Then, with startling quickness, we all began chatting like hens.  The inclusion was physical.  When I'd approached as Ned, they had only bothered to turn halfway around to talk to me, their faces always in profile.  Now they turned all the way. 

[Later] I found myself thinking about rejection and how small it made me feel.  Dating women as a man was a lesson in female power.  I disliked women irrationally for a while because of it.  I disliked their superiority, their accusatory smiles, their entitlement to choose or dash me with a fingertip. 

One reason this section struck a chord with me is that the dynamics Vincent describes seem oh so very familiar.  I've been in bars with groups of female friends when a man approaches. I have observed the icy tolerance my friends have extended to these poor saps.  This type of interaction always makes me incredibly ill at ease, because I hate seeing people embarrassed. It is at odds with my own instinct towards acting with an eager puppy-dog friendliness towards anyone who hasn't yet proven to be ill-intentioned.   

Warmth and friendliness, however, can get a woman into trouble in this context, because it is perceived as promising something.  I am not saying life is a cake-walk for men, who to this day are perceived as responsible for initiating all romantic interactions, but women seemed to be damned-if-we-do and damned-if-we-don't.  We are, after all, still considered responsible for policing men's behavior and "not leading him on."

The technique I perfected in public places like bars was the full-face, warm smile, accompanied by a firm, "It's very nice to meet you, but I came here to catch up with my friend."  This has the advantage of being up-front without forcing me to take on an ambiguous ice-queen demeanor that makes me uncomfortable.  Unfortunately, this directness often resulted in men storming off angrily or calling me names or simply ignoring my request to be left alone.  Very few men withdrew politely (and back in my single days, those were the men I always wished I HAD talked to after all).   Frankly, the ice queen approach seems a bit safer because it rarely provoked an angry reaction; instead, the man would eventually give up in defeat and we women could get back to laughing and talking to each other.

Of course, a lot of the problem is that there is no well-defined dating etiquette in our culture.  Manners are not taught in any systematic way and, even if they were, there is no real consensus in our culture as to what appropriate dating etiquette is. Since there is no established etiquette, the raw power dynamics take over, each side's prejudices hold sway, and people get hurt. 

I have suggested some tips here that I think would go a long way towards reducing misunderstandings between the sexes.      

(NOTE:  I should also point out that Vincent apparently experienced not only a sense of vulnerability towards women but a sense of entitlement as well. Why SHOULD she have expected anything but an icy reception when interrupting a group of strange women who were already "absorbed in conversation" ?)

Comments

[will]

Clearly she must not have been hot as a "he" and didnt exude being rich.

In all seriousness, I find it hard to determine many lessons about serious dating from bar life. I do not think that learning how to meet people in a bar is a great life lesson.

[The Happy Feminist]

Misogynist!

[The Happy Feminist]

Actually, I think you're right. If I had sons, I would definitely advise against trying to meet women in bars. As a woman and a lover of bar-hopping, however, this kind of approach is inevitable. I guess it's a luxury in a way to be able to go to a bar and have a conversation with a friend without being bothered.

But I do think that men (not all of you) sometimes resent being women in other dating contexts as well . . .

[Sara]

A lot of people confuse directness with rudeness. A guy walks in between you and a friend who are having a conversation, and tries to start a conversation by saying, "Oh, am I interrupting?" Well, yes, you are. No, it's not rude for me to tell you that. If you're just looking to get to know someone at a bar, walk up, shake their hand, and tell them who you are and what made you want to talk to them ("I overheard you talking about dog training," or "I saw you at a movie the other day," etc.)

But you're definitely right, HF. It doesn't take a lot for someone to accuse you of "leading them on." I think it just comes down to the accepted notion that if you introduce yourself to someone of the gender you want to sleep with in a bar, you're trying to sleep with them. There are places that aren't meat markets like that, but in my college town, there aren't a lot.

This is definitely one thing that being married makes easier.

[will]

"what made you want to talk to them ("I overheard you talking about dog training," or "I saw you at a movie the other day," etc.)"

Multiple choice quiz. If men (or women) followed Sara's advice, which statement would be made most often:

a. "I could tell from a distance that you were smart."

b. "I could tell from a distance that you were witty."

c. "I could tell from a distance that you had a great butt."

Or "Watching you dance made me think that:

a. "You are a sweet considerate person."

b. "You would be great in bed."

c. "You love Rilke's poems just like me!"

[norbizness]

I've read other excerpts of this book on other sites, and invariably my bullshit meter jumps into the red. Does the question "Where the [obscenity deleted] is your [obscene gerund deleted] Adam's Apple?" ever appear in the book?

[The Happy Feminist]

Nor, ever heard of Teena Brandon?

And if I had a dollar for every time I've heard that Rilke line . . .

[alsis39]

Will beat me to it.

Maybe for her next trick, Norah should make herself over to look like an undesireable woman and then go back to the bar --and the world at large-- to observe in detail the differences between being a beautiful woman at the bar and being a supposedly ugly one.

Say she put on fifty pounds, added some crows-feet, got an out-of-date hairdo, thick glasses, no makeup. Say she didn't shave her pits for a month and then sat around in a bar in a tanktop while reading Brownmiller or Dworkin. Mind you, she would be respectably dressed and clean. She would speak nicely in a well-modulated tone, but she wouldn't look like a Desperate Housewife[tm].

How many of these poor, misunderstood guys would even approach her ?

Yes, I'm a smart-ass. I can't help it. It's a middle-child thing.

[Sara]

Well, will, my point was that typical meat-market reasons aren't going to work if you're introducing yourself to a woman who isn't interested in sleeping with you. If you're going out to get laid, I see no reason to begrudge a woman making clear she isn't interested in being hit on.

[will]

Sara:
I was just teasing you a little.

If you are looking to get laid, then you would want a quick no so you can move quickly to buying drinks for a different girl.

Is a free drink and implicit contract? Two free beers = one sloppy kiss? Three expensive mixed drinks = dance floor grinding? Delicious cheese sticks with marinara sauce = ?

Curious minds want to know. (I never really did the bar scene myself.)

[will]

"Yes, I'm a smart-ass. I can't help it. It's a middle-child thing."

me too!

[The Happy Feminist]

Yeah, but that's sorta my point. And again this is anecdotal, but it seemed to me back in the day that more often than not the sort of men who hit on women in bars get angry at a quick "no" as much as they do at the icy string-along.

And no, a free drink is NOT an implicit contract, regardless of what the free drink buyers would like to believe. Or at least it's not a free contract in the sense you are implying. A free drink is a contract for a couple minutes of the person's company. Two free drinks is a contract for a couple more minutes of the person's company. Etc. The rest is just luck and chemistry.

Personally, I like bars, but not the meat market variety. I like English pubs and American working class bars where you can just hang out, watch TV, chat, maybe play some darts, and ideally not get hit on.

[will]

Yeah, but dinner is another story, right??

[The Happy Feminist]

Are we talking McDonalds or Chez Pierre?

[will]

Nothing but the best for you HappyF!

So, McDonald's Happy Meal, no action?

Alain Ducasse at the Essex House, lots of action?

[The Happy Feminist]

Just askin' a question.

[Richard]

"Warmth and friendliness, however, can get a woman into trouble in this context, because it is perceived as promising something [...] We are, after all, still considered responsible for policing men's behavior and 'not leading him on.'"

Are all the men in your world twelve years old, or was the carnie your only source? You sound the perfect misandrist, Ms Happy. I mean, seriously, can you *imagine* the hullabaloo if I opined that men are considered "responsible for policing women's behavior"? Pandagon and Blame Patriarchy would uncoil serpent heads and ejaculate great streams of fire.

Don't you tempt my churlishness, hear?

[The Happy Feminist]

Actually, it's Ms. Feminist. Happy is my first name.

But I am saying that women are EXPECTED to police men and set the boundaries of "how far" the interaction will go. I ain't saying it's right. To the contrary!

[will]

I am disappointed. I thought there would be more commenters on the beer for boobs concept. I guess my sarcasim was too obvious. I feel like the Adorable Advark! What's a guy got to do?!?!?!?

[The Happy Feminist]

Of course, the Adorable Aardvark is only fifteen, according to his profile. (No offense Adorable.)

[mythago]

Ooh, is HF the Misandrist of the Week?

What's amazing is that Vincent sees women's power to reject men's advances as "power over men" and something mean and unfair--that it's reasonable for men to resent women purely for refusing to reciprocate interest.

[drumgurl]

Doesn't Vincent realize that women get treated this way by other women too? I had tons of women look down their noses at me in college because I wasn't rich. And I agree with alsis that it's not women in general who act this way, but rather a certain kind of woman (the princess-wannabe kind).

At the same time, I can see the point of view of the snob at least a little. Remember Happy's "cute girl" post? She said something about people constantly demanding her attention, and thinking they were entitled to it. (Or maybe a commenter said that?) Anyway, I don't think I ever act like a snob about it, but it is very frustrating trying to juggle your time when everyone wants to socialize with you. If you decline, no matter how nicely, you're still considered a snob.

[h sofia]

Piggy backing off of what Mythago said ... why is it that acceptance (of someone's advances) is equated with acquiescence? Subservience? I wish we could take the "power" out of dating in the first place, but that's probably just a pie in the sky fantasty of mine. I am with the person I'm with because when I met him, I felt like we were equal. I didn't feel either of us had "power" over the other at all.

[Txfeminist]

I think she is confusing "power over" with "freedom to".

I have heard some other stuff about her opinions that bug me, and this just adds to the list.

[humbition]

A reasonable appreciation that both genders are "damned if they do, damned if they don't" is a good recipe for a beginning at detente.

That both genders have good reasons for doing what they do, and that it is hard on both.

New rituals would be nice. But they are taking place within an increasingly unequal, competitive individualist society -- so they are unlikely to be better than the society at large we are building.

Anyway, sympathetic understanding, in and of itself, can be a good thing.