Friends Don't Ask Friends Out to Dinner: Episode 92
by Motte Brown on 10/22/2009 at 2:59 PM
 iTunes | Listen Now/RSS |
Road Rage -- 0:00
What happens to people when they get behind the wheel of a car? It seems the slightest inconvenience can turn the nicest person into Bilbo Baggins from that scene in Lord of Rings when he sees the ring around Frodo's neck. I don't know about you, but it describes me perfectly. Right down to the shame he feels when he comes to his senses. Well, in this week's Roundtable, we share our ungracious failings in the car and try to get to the bottom of this phenomenon.
Bob the Tomato -- 17:25
The co-creator of Veggie Tales (and voice of Bob the Tomato), Phil Vischer, visited Focus on the Family last week and we got a chance to interview him about his rise and fall and rise again story. In part one of this two part series, Phil shares how he envisioned himself as the Christian Walt Disney and how that was different than what God had planned for him.
Friends Don't Ask Friends Out to Dinner -- 32:55
I'm going to share a tip for all the single guys out there that may ruin the surprise ending (not really) to this Inbox segment from Candice Watters: Do not ask a girl out to dinner unless you're interested in pursuing her as a potential spouse. Period. If you need companionship, get together with your buddies. If you need to eat, stop by McDonald's on the way home from work.
Note: And please guys, if you're thinking about writing to complain that we're bashing men again, don't. These are the Inbox questions we get. If you have some questions of your own about the mysteries of the fairer sex, we'll be happy to answer those as well.
1. Tami said the following at 3:27 PM on Oct 22:
I saw the title of this podcast and thought: Huh?!?!? Friends shouldn't go out to dinner together?
Then I remembered I was reading Boundless, and realized what, precisely, you were talking about :)
2. obewan said the following at 3:34 PM on Oct 22:
Do not ask a girl out to dinner unless you're interested in pursuing her as a potential spouse. (BOUNDLESS)
------------------------------------
Sometimes on this blog it seems the men just can't win. Isn't the suggested approach putting the cart before the horse? I could never know if I was interested in a woman as a potential spouse without first getting to know her. That might happen at dinner. Perhaps the real issue is with the woman getting her hopes up and then being rejected after said dinner.
Once in my past, my housemates and I attempted to meet the women 1/2 way. We invited them to our house once a month for a home cooked meal and board games with no one paired off.
Most of the women at our church were very happy we had reached out to them until we got to the bottom of the barrel. Yes, we even invited the spherical and unattractive women, and they were the only ones who became angry and refused because as one young lady put it we were "parading the women through for inspection." That put an end to our hospitality, and the most beautiful woman in the group confided in me that she was disappointed because she was still waiting for her invitation.
3. Matt Tucker said the following at 4:09 PM on Oct 22:
Do not ask a girl out to dinner unless you're interested in pursuing her as a potential spouse.
Conversely: ladies, if a guy asks you out to dinner, consider it a date. Long ago, I asked this girl out. We had a fun time, so I thought. I drove her home to drop her off, and before she got out of the car, she told me, 'So, umm... I didn't know this was a date.'
It's funny now. :)
4. Jeremiah said the following at 4:29 PM on Oct 22:
I don’t care what Boundless says, I happen to enjoy having a couple of Godly, strictly-plutonic, female friends… and yes, I happen to like meeting them on occasion for one-on-one coffee or lunch. A lot of times we talk about dating and can offer each other advice and insight into how the other gender thinks. What’s so wrong about that?
FYI, if I make the invite I always offer to pay. For the women that have had a guy not offer to pay, maybe you should try dating more engineers and fewer rafting guides… ;) Hate to blame the "victim" here - but come on ladies, if you all didn't reward so much bad behavior, maybe there'd be more "good guys" around.
5. Carrie said the following at 4:29 PM on Oct 22:
With all due respect, I think the way you described the women by their outward appearance in this comment, sir who wrote above me, might be the real reason none of you all matched up. I'd suggest praying about how you see the single women around you--not just in categories of "the beautiful", and "the we feel sorry for motley crew." Just a suggestion.
I understand the dinners being confusing--I made the mistake last year of having a bible study with a couple of guy friends and sometimes cooking dinners (not purposely just guys, the invited gals rarely showed up)--when nothing was going to come of it more then friends, it got frustrating and had to come to an end. I decided no more cooking dinners for just guy "friends" unless it's a mixed group!
I was judged for not having the right color hair because of a dream one of the guys had- I considered him otherwise quite godly and together...such is life.
Don't give up. Faith without works is dead.
6. Rebekah in SoCal said the following at 4:36 PM on Oct 22:
Obewan,
I think that pre-dates or actual dates (depending on your preferred label) where you are getting to know a woman is just FINE. But it's with the intention of getting to know her to see if she could be a potential spouse.
The issue is when you have a friend (who you think will only ever be a friend) who is a woman, but you have "date-like" outings (i.e. "Would you like to go out to dinner"), but you aren't trying to get to know to see if she could be a potential spouse. It looks like a date, sets expectations that it IS a date, BUT it isn't.
Maybe if a man is CLEAR that the issue is 1)he is planning on being hungry on Friday night 2)he would like to eat dinner at a resturant on Friday night 3)he doesn't want to eat alone 4)she is nice to talk to and would be plesant "just friend" company . . . then the man would not be defrauding the woman or leading her to believe it was more than it appeared.
If a guy wanted to get to know me to see if I might be someone he might like to pursue as a potential spouse (meaning he's interested, but doesn't know me well enough to be sure) . . . and we went on a few dates and then he felt that I was a "no-go", I would not feel mis-lead (possible dissapointed but definately NOT defrauded).
7. endlessnights said the following at 4:40 PM on Oct 22:
obewan @ 2 - your dinner idea sounds great!! You're not treating it like a meat market, it's simply a tool to get to know some ladies.
8. Rebekah in SoCal said the following at 5:01 PM on Oct 22:
Obewan,
Thank you (and also your housemates) for stepping out and get to know the women. I am sorry that they responded so gracelessly.
When stuff like that happens I can see why guys get exsasperated and can't figure out what women want.
9. Jeremiah said the following at 5:04 PM on Oct 22:
Also, there is nothing wrong with expecting the guy to pay for a date. However, I am shocked at the number of times I have paid for the meal and not heard a “thank you”. That’s a deal breaker for me.
10. Ashley Ramsey said the following at 5:12 PM on Oct 22:
McDonalds? Can someone change that to Subway? ;)
11. k.k. said the following at 5:52 PM on Oct 22:
Like someone commented before, if the person is CLEAR that this is just a platonic outing, that it must be communicated and agreed upon. Now granted, he or she may have some feelings there to say yes. For me personally, I would prefer to hang out in the breakfast/lunch hours if I this was a friend. But, we definitely have to watch our motives when these situations come up.
12. Andrea-Elena said the following at 5:59 PM on Oct 22:
Yo, sistahs, Candice and Lisa. I am under the tutelage! I now have the policy y'all recommend. I put it in place last year. No real dates since, but no undates either. =)
obewan,
On behalf of the sisterhood, those gals were rude and ungrateful, and I am sorry they treated you and your roomies that way. Your idea to be the hosts was excellent, and I hope you resurrect it when the time is right.
Jeremiah,
On behalf of the sisterhood, I thank you for being a gentleman, whether with friends or dates. And thank you for paying! =)
13. BDB said the following at 6:00 PM on Oct 22:
Well, I'm not going to quarrel with you about discouraging dinner invitations for people you're definiely not interested in. That can lead to confusion. Particularly as the questioner indicated, the dinner invitation came after SEVERAL one-on-one activities.
I agree with the suggestion that as soon as he said, "You're just a friend," asking, "Then why did you ask me out to dinner?" And letting him answer.
I'm going to stay internally consistent and encourage people to be flexible in going to at least ONE initial lunch and coffee with people even if it's not a "date."
I like the way Elisabeth Elliot sets the boundary, if it's not a date, each pays for their own food.
I am going to quarrel with this:
>>If you need companionship, get together with your buddies.<<
I need to be honest with you folks about this idea: over the last couple of years, what I've noticed about the people who DID get married in their early 20's is that they are way, way, way more open than that. They're the ones extending the invitations to single members of the opposite sex to go to a BBQ or at the beach for a bonfire or going out for drinks.
The advice to "only hang out with your buddies" (or girlfriends) really makes it hard for people to get to know each other in a neutral setting. Lots of women are reluctant to accept a date from someone they don't know very well. And frankly, men are going to be a lot more confident in the asking if they are already reasonably satisfied that the woman in question is kind, doesn't have a volatile personality that explodes at the first disagreement, and that she doesn't constantly speak negatively about people behind their back. Those kind of red flags will often become apparent in a group situation where people have unstructred time to talk.
Because if you don't have the chance to talk to someone you don't know very well, that first dinner is going to be really uncomfortable, and that nervousness might get in the way of anything else.
The reality is that people are operating under a wide variety of different boundary schemes, and you might need that initial discussion over coffee to figure out if you're even operating under the same set of rules. If a woman sets their boundary that the will NEVER talk with a guy over coffee unless it's a date, she shouldn't complain about being single because she's getting in her own way.
14. Jennifer said the following at 6:20 PM on Oct 22:
Friends don't ask friends out to dinner.
This is an interesting point that is being made. Why I say this is, many people don't seem to realize that when someone asks someone of the opposite gender out to dinner and do not mean anything by it, it sends mixed signals. It's not fair to do that to someone, so it's a good point. Also, a few weeks ago, my boyfriend called me to ask me if he could go to dinner with a friend who was a girl. I was like, no way! Yet to him it seemed like no big deal since in his mind it wasn't a date. Yet, two people going out to dinner together is a date no matter how you put it. Maybe people just like to call it a date when they really want it to be a date. I just don't think that's the way it is. Also, I don't think this is guy bashing at all, just trying to get people to realize how they are making people feel and sending mixed signals.
Also, Subway sounds way better to me :-).
15. BDB said the following at 6:36 PM on Oct 22:
#2 wrote:
>>and the most beautiful woman in the group confided in me that she was disappointed because she was still waiting for her invitation.<<
Um...you don't have to respond to this on the blog at all...
But if someone said that to me, I believe the proper response would be, "Oh, would you like to come over Saturday for some grilled steak?"
16. Kelly-1 said the following at 7:35 PM on Oct 22:
That question could have come from me several years ago. We did a lot of 1-on-1 activities, he repeatedly asked me out to dinner, yet when I finally pushed the issue of "What is this?" I was told, "Just a friendship."
(This was after a night where we sat in the park til dawn, talking, and him playing songs for me on his guitar.) Is it any wonder I'm quite cynical these days? ;)
----
Jeremiah - that's very gentlemanly of you that you offer to pay. I would caution: if it's definitely a date, then it is appropriate for you to pay (and she must also say thank you). If it's definitely NOT a date, then I would advise splitting the bill, just to lessen the confusion.
This is how I behave: if we are friends, I split. If it's a date, I offer to split but graciously accept his offer to pay if he makes it.
17. T.V. said the following at 7:37 PM on Oct 22:
I agree with Jeremiah (#4) that guys can enjoy platonic relationships with girls (visa versa). I believe Boundless' answer is simply assuming that girls (or guys) cannot create boundaries or control the flesh. It assumes any interest is sexual interest. The secular world is far better at platonic relationships than Christians. And I think it's a shame.
18. Samuel said the following at 7:58 PM on Oct 22:
Where is the remainder of the interview with Phil Vischer? I was so encouraged by his story of growth, and God directing him out of "taking over the world." This is one of best interviews I have heard in a long time. I feel like there is a lot of pressure to build, and be one that takes over, and I can forget, maybe I'm not supposed to take over the world, but Jesus is. Will the rest be posted next week?
19. Chrysti said the following at 8:39 PM on Oct 22:
Kelly-1 (#16): I know the feeling. I went through something very similar in college. Intentions and expectations need to be set at the beginning if you are going to go to dinner with a friend of the opposite gender. This avoids all heartbreak and confusion. When these expectations are set, it is possible to have a "platonic" relationship, as T.V. (#17) mentioned. Just my 2¢ from my own experience...
20. BDB said the following at 8:45 PM on Oct 22:
The Veggie Tales interview was great. I'd love to read that contract and the court filings to understand what happened and avoid making those mistakes in the future.
I do think that his response to the incident puts him close to Elisabeth Elliot's theology; e.g. that unless the Lord builds the house, they labor in vain who build it.
The business book he references (that didn't work) is more along the line of John Eldridge's philosophy, that success comes from taking matters into one's own hands.
21. Mike from WI said the following at 8:57 PM on Oct 22:
If you're meeting regularly one on one, that's dating.
If you're meeting in a group, or 2-3 people, that's not dating, unless you're in junior high.
As far as deciphering who picks up the tab, that's too much relationship code. As a man, you always offer...friends or dating.
Seriously, I think the point is just to man up, be intentional, and then be yourself. Ladies, I don't know who these guys are that keep taking up your time just to be your good friend, but real men don't do that.
I also think as guys we need to stop complaining about rejection. Its happened to all of us, and its not the end of the world. I never heard my grandfather or father complain about it, or even mention it for that matter.
I think women have much more to lose in dating relationships anyway. So give'em a break, ask them out, pay, and if they aren't interested, be nice and let it go.
22. Dave said the following at 10:42 PM on Oct 22:
Re: #21. Mike from WI
On what basis?
23. KayDub said the following at 10:42 PM on Oct 22:
Obewan,
Bad day? I was shocked by your comments about the "bottom of the barrel"/"spherical"/"unattractive" girls. I've never seen you be so harsh. Maybe since you knew the personalities you could judge them as unattractive but to say that the "bottom of the barrel" is the less physically ideal isn't really playing fair with any girl.
Mike from WI- well said.
24. Tami said the following at 10:51 PM on Oct 22:
Now that I've heard the podcast...
Yeah, the guy was TOTALLY misleading "Laurel." I agree with Candice's advice. The money is, indeed, not the issue; the faux-dating is.
I used to go out to lunch with guys from work; it was totally clear what was going on -- work buddies. And group dinners... it's been a long time since guys have been at any group dinners I've attended, but I wouldn't assume that a group dinner was a date.
But there's something about non-work, one-on-one dinners that are very "date-y," whether the people are admitting it or not. So I might say, guys, don't ask a woman out for dinner unless you consider her, at some level, a candidate for a possible relationship. I too would be incredibly frustrated if a guy asked me out one-on-one several times and then, out of nowhere, busted out the "we're just friends" line.
And honestly, if a guy has asked me out more than once and I do not consider him "marriage material" for myself, I will let him know (that is, if he's making it clear he's interested). If he is *not* making his level of interest clear (friends? potential?) I will steer him towards group activities. If he's just friends, no worries -- the more the merrier. If he's interested, that group invitation will force him to make his intentions clear. He will either say, "oh... I wanted to be with you" (in which case I know he thought of me as a date) or... he'll cancel/give up.
Like Candice and Lisa said - if the guy is interested, and seemingly pursuing me as a potential relationship, it is really up to him to make that clear, at least to the point of me knowing if he's asking me on a real date or not.
Also:
"He defrauded me and all I got was this lousy t-shirt (*that I paid for)."
25. Craig M. said the following at 12:05 AM on Oct 23:
Well, your heart is in the right place, Boundless. But you're just wrong. The idea that a guy should have any serious idea about whether or not he's going to pursue a woman as his wife BEFORE THE FIRST DATE TAKES PLACE is crazy advice that will result in a lot of single 40-year-old men. Discerning such things is what dating is FOR. I have no difficulty with the negative version of your advice, however, which would be: If you have already discerned that you will not be pursuing a woman as your wife, don't ask her out. If you've already made a judgment call, you don't need time for discernment.
26. Natalie said the following at 12:35 AM on Oct 23:
Re #21 Mike:
Way to go! You definitely know what it means to "man up" and your post was refreshing. It's easy for us single ladies to wonder, 'Where are the MEN? the Bravehearts? (emphasis on Brave) who are willing to take a little risk---and minus the whining???'
I think there would be a lot less confusion if guys would predetermine to be gentlemanly, intentional, and forthright from the start as you have. Christ is glorified when y'all seek to protect our hearts!
27. BDB said the following at 1:36 AM on Oct 23:
Mike (#21) wrote:
>>I never heard my grandfather or father complain about it, or even mention it for that matter. <<
That's because the WWII generation lived in a very different time. Neither men nor women were worried about finding a "soul mate" for one thing.
Before someone had to start being intentional, they had the opportunity to invite people home for family events. My grandfather's family, for example, had a very large tree-trimming and Christms-caroling event every year. The house was packed...with guys and girls they knew, not just people they were "dating."
Alas, today we Americans live in a country broken by divorce. Many people do not have that kind of stable home they are comfortable inviting friends to in order to get to know them. For some people, the poverty created by divorce means that their home simply isn't big enough, not to mention the cost of entertaining. So people don't learn how to be social in the same way. And in particularly nasty divorces, some people would never want to introduce someone they're just getting to know to a really negative parent anyway.
Many women reject the homemaker role of their grandmothers, and seem perplexed that men aren't stepping up like their grandfathers. Why is this a surprise? Change the role of women, particularly where they are taking initiative in their careers, and many start taking initiative in social settings, too. Men quickly learn that there are plenty of women who will take initiative and ask them out. Particularly non-Christian women who would never read a book like I Kissed Dating Goodbye.
We live in a time when the secular world defines dating = sex. So a lot of people decide they're not dating anymore to avoid being pressured into sex. Yes, this is something non-Christian women do as a coping mechanism. And if they take the initiative to set the boundary as a non-dating relationship, they can then suggest dinner, a movie, Disneyland, Phantom of the Opera or any number of other activities in order to get to know men after having defined the boundary to avoid being pressured into sex.
So how do you get to know people if you "don't date anymore?" You simply re-define dinner and other activities as "not-a-date." It removes the expectation of sex and, frankly, puts the social expectation back much closer to what my grandparent's expectation was: hands off and clothes on.
So, once again, to avoid confusing someone who equates dating with an active sexual relationship, start with a simple lunch or cup of coffee where you can let them know up front that your boundary for a dating relationship is hands off and clothes on (or wherever you put your boundary.)
28. Michelle (in the UK) said the following at 1:57 AM on Oct 23:
Mike from WI...
thank you for that answer.
thank you so much!
29. Elizabeth H. (Russia) said the following at 2:24 AM on Oct 23:
Friend group dinners are fun and great at promoting group interaction.
However, they sometimes prolong the "just friends" stalemate. What guy is going to look for a wife if he has plenty of female friends to cook for him?
Guys? What do you think? Does enjoying female hospitality make you want to be married, or just make you appreciate a good meal?
30. Blue Sarah said the following at 4:17 AM on Oct 23:
Lisa is my authority on all things funny.
31. Jo said the following at 4:40 AM on Oct 23:
Jremiah #4:
"I don’t care what Boundless says, I happen to enjoy having a couple of Godly, strictly-plutonic, female friends… and yes, I happen to like meeting them on occasion for one-on-one coffee or lunch."
Amen. Although I hope they're platonic, not actually plutonic - that would make you Mickey Mouse. :)
"FYI, if I make the invite I always offer to pay."
I'm not with you on this bit though. I agree with what a couple of others have said - I think if it's not a date, each should usually pay for themselves to avoid any confusion or awkwardness. Now if there's another reason to pay - it's her birthday or something - then by all means pay.
And I guess, if it's very very clearly a platonic friendship and you're absolutely confident that you both know it and neither of you have hopes in any other direction, then you can pretty much make your own rules, because it won't create confusion. But that's a dangerous assumption to make because people's feelings can be well-hidden, and they can also change.
Some of it depends on the dynamics of the relationship though, and if you're a guy (as you seem to be) who routinely pays for female friends, and that's established and known by all concerned, then you'll probably get away with it and they'll probably quite like it! But even so, I think it helps to set up a definite "This is a date and this isn't" pattern, either with paying/not paying or in some other way.
"if you all didn't reward so much bad behavior, maybe there'd be more "good guys" around."
I don't think it's bad behaviour not to pay if it's not a date. I actually feel a bit awkward if I go out with a guy for the first time on a supposedly 'just friends' outing and he pays for me. It makes me think his intentions are somewhat different from those advertised.
One final thing: to me (perhaps only me) there's a difference between lunch and dinner. I routinely have lunch with guy friends, but if one called me up and invited me out for dinner, I'd start to wonder. To me, dinner is a date, unless it comes as part of another activity.
32. obewan said the following at 6:23 AM on Oct 23:
#23. KayDub said the following at 10:42 PM on Oct 22:
Obewan,
Bad day? I was shocked by your comments about the "bottom of the barrel"/"spherical"/"unattractive" girls. I've never seen you be so harsh. Maybe since you knew the personalities you could judge them as unattractive but to say that the "bottom of the barrel" is the less physically ideal isn't really playing fair with any girl.
-------------------------------------
Sorry if people misunderstood my comment. My mother always told me that when it comes to women "pretty is as pretty does". My note about bottom of the barrel was more directed towards their response to our hospitality than their looks.
After all they were in line BEFORE the supermodel - and YES she WAS a real supermodel who had been photographed for several major fashion magazines. She was last in line and we were doing our level best to consider all the women in the church as sisters first above everything else.
But, attraction issues are related to how God made us. Both sexes are in denial if they try to make the claim that attraction does not matter. If not, any women on this blog are welcome to date and marry any ugly men they want too. I will believe it when I see it too – at least attractive women paired with ugly men. Birds of a feather flock together as the saying goes.
33. Blue Sarah said the following at 6:24 AM on Oct 23:
A big "Thank you" to all the real men in my life who don't keep taking up my time just to be my good friend.
34. Katrece said the following at 7:18 AM on Oct 23:
Please know that I am entirely being facetious in saying this. Also, I am not referring to other aspects of physical appearance.
#5, maybe you should consider dying your hair :0
35. Sarah P. said the following at 7:27 AM on Oct 23:
Obewan, I think I can understand where the "bottom of the barrel" girls were coming from. If you were inviting all the women -- some of whom you actually wanted to spend time with, and others simply because you felt you had to -- perhaps the different attitudes were more obvious than you think. I think that could be humiliating for those women. I know I wouldn't want to be invited somewhere because the other person felt obligated. :P Just a thought...
36. Loris said the following at 7:31 AM on Oct 23:
Obewan, I don't see anything inaccurate about calling a group of people "bottom of the barrel." Tactless and too-honest, yes, but it's probably a correct description. I know plenty of "bottom of the barrel" guys. They're ugly, unfit, have strange personalities and can't hold down a job. That says "bottom of the barrel" to me.
Perhaps your "bottom of the barrel" women were dumpy and frumpy, and loud about how if God loves them the way they are, men should too? Heard that one many times before.
37. Julie said the following at 7:52 AM on Oct 23:
It is really tricky. Looking back to my single years, I quite enjoyed going out to dinner with various guy friends, but I was not romantically interested in these specific men. The ones who frustrated me were the ones who flirted, asked me to do various things, offered to give me rides on a regular basis, made comments that seemed to express interest, but never overtly asked me on a date or expressed romantic interest. Women are in a vulnerable position because we have no idea what a man is thinking, and we can wait and wait and wait (and waste a lot of time) hoping a man will pursue. At least men, if they are interested in a woman, can ask her out and immediately get an idea of whether she is a possibility or not. Looking back, I feel angry that some men seemed to be using me for an ego boost, or to meet other emotional or social needs. Meanwhile, my heart got all tangled up, my focus went on him, and I wasn't getting to know other men as I should have. Obviously that was my responsibility too, but men, please be sensitive and if you aren't interested, either make it clear or leave women alone.
38. Sheridan said the following at 8:04 AM on Oct 23:
Thank you Mike. Let's call a date a date.
39. Mandy from IN said the following at 8:08 AM on Oct 23:
Mike from WI - I appreciate your insight. Well said.
40. Sheridan said the following at 8:08 AM on Oct 23:
Re # 21. Thank you Mike. Let's call a date a date.
41. Scott said the following at 8:25 AM on Oct 23:
Nonsense – if it’s not a date, the man needn’t offer to pay at all, nor should he be expected to. What do you base this on, Mike?
I agree with BDB [13]:
…and Kelly [16]:
Simple and clear...
Paying for a ‘non-date’ [assuming the guy has made himself clear on this point] has nothing to do with ‘manning up’. Making it clear that it’s not a date, then paying is just going to send mixed signals – the opposite of being intentional and deliberate; real men don’t do that.
How do you come to this conclusion?
42. sarah elizabeth said the following at 8:25 AM on Oct 23:
ahh...Dont pay for a date unless its a date! I like that you guys are considerate and willing to pay. YOure gentleman attitude is worth giving some props too. However, ANY time I do something one on one with a guy and he ends up paying...even if I didnt think it was a date before, I go *oh my, I was just on a date.* For girls, its a clear sign. if there is ever a time in which a one on one situation with a guy in unclear, my determining factor is always who pays. If we split, just a friends thing. If he pays, its a date.
SO guys, I know you are trying to be nice and a gentleman, but actually, by offering to pay on a non date, you are being VERY confusing and potentially leading a girl on.
[obviously there are exceptiong, i.e. you owe her money, she stated she has no money and couldnt afford it, she actually forgot her wallet, etc]
but please, for as much as paying might be a gentleman act, when it results in misleading a girl, the gentleman part of the act is gone.
sorry to blunt guys, but Ive seen a lot of girls (myself included) very confused by this.
43. Amir Larijani said the following at 8:29 AM on Oct 23:
Motte says:
LOL Motte, that was a terrible choice of restaurants. That will perpetuate our obesity epidemic.
Seriously, I'd say that's a good general rule, although we can--at least I know I can--find exceptional instances.
T.V. says:
Hogwash. This is less about boundaries--you are the one assuming this is all about sex--and more about clarity.
The last thing a gal needs is confusion as to whether the guy is pursuing her, or "just wants to be friends". Moreover, there are times where people--of both sexes--state one thing ("I just want to be friends") when in fact they have another thing (possible romantic interests) in mind.
I'm not excusing such duplicity--in fact, I tend to be hostile to it--but rather pointing out that this is the way it is.
44. sarah elizabeth said the following at 8:47 AM on Oct 23:
If a guy and a girl have had a converstaion about how they are just friends or platonic (and not necessarily a specific DTR, can be a convo in passing), I think they van successfully hang out one on one and have it be just that-2 friends hanging out. However, if that conversation has not happened, then it gets tricky. After on event alone with a guy, especially if its coffee, a lot of girls wont think too much. Any even after that though-and she is going to be thinking he is interested.
If that happens, there are 2 ways this can go....a)she is interested and gets dissappointed and feels led on when she realizes he meant nothing by it or b)She is not interested, doesnt want to encourage him, yet doesnt know how to say no when its not expressly a date.
Also guys, beware-if you make a habit out of hanging with a number of girls one on one (and its not clear that its just as friends and thats all), you may get a reputation for being on the hunt. I have a guy friend that in the name of friendship, has pursued one on one hang out time with multiple girls over a period of a few months. Quite frankly, even though he says its as friends-he pursues them with what feels like more than just friends. It appears and feels like he is on the look out for a relationship. And the variety of girls he keeps asking makes it seem like he is willing to date any female that breathes, is a christian and relatively cute.
45. k.k. said the following at 8:47 AM on Oct 23:
@#21
"Ladies, I don't know who these guys are that keep taking up your time just to be your good friend, but real men don't do that."
That was a bold statement!
46. Tim said the following at 8:54 AM on Oct 23:
What? Friends can't listen to "Endless Love" in the dark? What is this world coming to? ;)
47. Philip said the following at 9:08 AM on Oct 23:
Let me throw into the mix a quote from Joshua Harris's Courtship Schmourtship sermon (starting 26:30).
48. Scott said the following at 9:14 AM on Oct 23:
BDB [13] wrote:
I completely agree. This advice reminds me of that given by Michael Lawrence in his article Real Men Risk Rejection (as if real women don’t). He writes:
With all due respect to Mr. Lawrence, this is…odd. Lawrence’s clearly misunderstands to whole point of flirting. Earlier in the same article he writes:
So flirting is all about ‘fear of man’? Lawrence apparently doesn’t understand that flirting is an expression of interest; a subtle one, yes, but one nonetheless.
Thus, according to Lawrence, I’m just supposed to walk up to a woman cold and be completely blunt – no flirting or anything like that:
From what I understand [from lots of reading and conversation], women, being the subtle creatures that they are, prefer a more subtle expression of interest up front – i.e. flirting. Correct me if I’m wrong ladies, but which approach would you prefer? Subtle, playful flirting (followed, eventually, by a clear expression of intention) or a bald statement of intention (i.e. marriage) right off the bat? And if he doesn't get around to stating his intentions, it's up to you to call him on it (ala Kelly [16].
I think Lawrence is way off base here trying to draw the lesson he does out of this passage. You can see this, in part, by using his logic to illustrate the lesson should women take from Genesis 2: To paraphrase him:
At the very least, Lawrence’s logic would require a woman to give the guy a first date. Using his logic, this lesson is as inescapable as the one he draws out of the passage. I think both are wrong-headed.
This all goes back to BDB's point - relationships, particularly get one off the ground isn’t nearly as cut and dry/black and white as some want to portray it.
49. Scott said the following at 9:44 AM on Oct 23:
Tami [24] wrote:24.
Thank you, thank you, thank you Tami – if there were more women like you, things would be a bit easier. For all the talk of men being clear about their intentions, how about women being clear in their responses?
I like this girl at work (I've chatted with her on a semi-regular basis and she'd have to be blind not to know), so I asked her out for a Saturday date (suggesting a date based on a personal interest she had expressed the day before) – she couldn’t, she said, because she was busy that day.
No problem – I continued stopping by her desk to chat with her on a semi-regular basis. I asked her out again for a Saturday lunch date about 1-1/2 months later. Again, she said she was busy. I immediately followed with:
She replied that it was ok to ask, but that she didn’t date guys she works with.
Now, she never said ‘No’ to me, making it clear she wasn’t interested in me. Her responses were all ‘situational’ (e.g. time, environment), never personal (directed at me). Nevertheless, I’ve interpreted all of this as non-interest. In this regard, I’ve heard women say that they do things like this because ‘I don’t want to hurt his feelings’ or the like. I can sympathize, but sometimes you have to ‘man up’ (or is it ‘woman up’?) and be clear. Speaking for myself, I would prefer a very clear ‘I’m just not interested/attracted to you’ or something like that. Sure, it would sting a bit, but at least it’s clear. Ladies, follow Tami’s lead and be clear in your responses regardless of how uncomfortable it might be for you.
p.s. and if you ever change your mind about him, you’re going to need to ‘woman up’ and find some way to make your change of mind very clear.
50. Benjamin said the following at 10:03 AM on Oct 23:
Wow, I was surprised by Candice's answer on the podcast. For those that haven't listened, a guy asked a girl if she wanted to go to dinner, and at the end the waiter asked "Are you together?", to which he said yes. We have all the makings of a sitcom episode here, he assumed the waiter meant for the purpose of the check (which he paid), she assumed the waiter meant as a couple.
The next time they had dinner together, it sounded like the man went out of his way to clarify that they were just friends and it was not a date. The woman was disappointed. Now this seems like a straightforward misunderstanding, but Candice really laid into the guy as if he had been outright lying instead of simply understanding an innocuous waiter question differently (and probably correctly, since it was a waiter).
It seems like one simple rule would save women all this type of disappointment. Don't assume something is a date unless it is specified as one. How hard is that? It doesn't seem to me like "I wanted this to be a date but it wasn't" deserves much sympathy.
51. Adam said the following at 10:36 AM on Oct 23:
Hey Everyone!
I can understand the woman's frustration, and, I agree, it really hurts when you think someone is interested in you, lead you on, and then say, "Oh, BTW, we are just friends."
However, I have another angle that I think needs to be addressed. You see, I think the problem here is honesty, and honesty from both sides. I am referring specifically to the sexual harassment laws, and how they are simply abused in today's culture. I have talked to lawyers in the past, and they have told me that these laws are simply out of control. They have told me that, not only is it mostly women who ask for things like restraining orders, but their reasons are becoming more and more absurd. These are the only laws where a punishment can be given without a trial. On top of all of this, there are real philosophical problems with these kinds of laws, and their lack of clarity makes them a target for abuse. Keep in mind that, because of this, men risk, not just rejection, but having their reputation ruined. If your response is, "be a man," then let me ask any woman out there if they would be willing to do something that could completely destroy their reputation, to the point where others will view you as a sexual pervert.
Therefore, I can understand why guys would have a difficult time being honest about being interested in a girl [i.e., defining the relationship]. What has to change here is honesty from both sides. While I agree that men need to be honest about their intentions for a girl, women need to be honest when they are not interested in a guy who is pursuing them. I don't mean give non-verbal signals; these could be interpreted in any number of different ways. I mean come right out and verbally say, "I know you have been pursuing me, but I am not interested in you."
The reality is that, until both sides start becoming honest with one another, and stop bashing one another, we will never truly be able to understand one another. I have listened to and read Boundless, and it helps me understand how women feel about things. I have also read websites like biblicalmanhood.blogspot.com and singlemind.net, and I can understand how men feel about things. The one conclusion to which I am coming is that there needs to be honesty on both sides of this discussion. Until that happens, I fear that these kinds of problems will continue.
God Bless,
Adam
52. Tami said the following at 10:42 AM on Oct 23:
Thanks Scott (49). I appreciate your encouragement.
Believe me, saying "no" is NOT easy for me. Not that the need for me to be so clear happens all that often :) -- but why drag something out?
I tend to be of the "If he seems like a good Christian guy, I need to give this a chance to see where this goes" stripe. "A chance" = one or two dates. But once it's absolutely clear it's a "no," it's only fair to be clear with the other person. I know what it's like to be misled and jerked around and it is NOT fun.
53. Jo said the following at 10:57 AM on Oct 23:
Scott:
"Correct me if I’m wrong ladies, but which approach would you prefer? Subtle, playful flirting (followed, eventually, by a clear expression of intention) or a bald statement of intention (i.e. marriage) right off the bat?"
Definitely the flirting. But he does need to keep it up and progress to deeper conversation etc. The girl isn't going to get the message just from flirting (we second-guess ourselves, A LOT), so you need to make sure you send consistent signals, and at some point actually declare interest - like you did with that girl. That is EXACTLY how a guy should handle things.
As a girl, there is nothing that frustrates me more than a guy who keeps showing interest but doesn't ever actually declare it. I might be 100% sure a guy likes me, but until he says it, I don't feel like I can say "Sorry, I'm not interested." It just feels really arrogant to assume it without being told, and anyway, why should I have to interpret? If you like me, say so.
Otherwise, I think a girl is perfectly justified in acting like she thinks you just see her as a friend, even if deep down she knows you don't. On the flip side, if she's kind, she won't want to lead you on, and because you haven't given her a chance to actually turn you down properly, she most likely will avoid you and make excuses if you ask her out in an ambiguous way.
Seriously guys, you can send her all the signals in the world (even paying for her dinner!!), but you need to actually say "I like you" if you want an honest response from her.
54. Tami said the following at 10:58 AM on Oct 23:
Benjamin (50): we could also say that additional clarity in the guy's actions themselves should help spare the woman some disappointment. To assume that something is "not a date" after several one-on-one invitations *is* incredibly difficult.
Here's where we women can't seem to win. A guy asks us out. If we don't assume it's a date, then we tend to act as friends, and the guy thinks we're not romantically interested, and then he never says anything about whether or not HE is interested. Then later, when we say "we're just friends" (in part, to spare ourselves disappointment and embarrassment) -- which is how the guy was acting -- then the guy is upset.
If we *do* think it's a date, and the guy drops the "we're just friends" line after several one-on-one outings, then we're left disappointed and it's our fault.
I don't think one date is a marriage proposal. I am not one to think ONE dinner invitation is a romantic date. But if the guy asks me out several times, of his own initiative, without some other circumstance surrounding the invitation (e.g., we were carpooling to the same evening class together), at a certain point I'm going to assume he's interested... unless he spends each and every dinner telling me how much he likes some other woman, or our conversation is SO centered around one particular topic (e.g., church work) that it's completely obvious that the mutual interest is about the TOPIC rather than EACH OTHER.
But then, I don't plan on allowing the repeated dinners/"oh, we're just friends" situation to happen to me again. I will request some level of clarity -- for my OWN sake.
55. Jo said the following at 11:17 AM on Oct 23:
Benajamin,
To be fair, she said he'd invited her out several times, and had been paying for her - and this wasn't a guy she was already friends with I think, but a guy she was just getting to know. If I was her, I would definitely have thought he was interested.
56. Tara (not the other Tara) said the following at 11:18 AM on Oct 23:
It seems like one simple rule would save women all this type of disappointment. Don't assume something is a date unless it is specified as one. How hard is that? It doesn't seem to me like "I wanted this to be a date but it wasn't" deserves much sympathy." (comment #50)
That's a rule I lived by after seeing friend after friend fall into a "buddy relationship". It saved me alot of heartache. And I think it shows the differences in how guys and girls think. I now refer to my first date with my now-husband as the first time we went out intentionally one on one (the movies). By intentionally I mean we planned to go just the two of us. We had been alone before but only when others failed to show up. But he refers to our first date as the time he announced his desire to have me as his girlfriend which was three weeks later. Now that we are together I recognized our first outing for what it was but even then I refused to call it a date....just in case...
Saying that, I ask guys to have some compassion on girls' tendency to read into things and culpability to get emotionally tangled with a guy. Be clear and try to keep platonic one-on-one time to a minimum.
57. Sunny said the following at 11:43 AM on Oct 23:
Yes, we even invited the spherical and unattractive women, and they were the only ones who became angry and refused because as one young lady put it we were "parading the women through for inspection." That put an end to our hospitality, and the most beautiful woman in the group confided in me that she was disappointed because she was still waiting for her invitation.
----------------------------------
Obewan,
You must not realize how arrogant you sound. That's unreal. I read your response later in this thread and you still sounded pompous. I would suggest taking a girl on official dates and with stated intentions get to know her. You don't have to be so *kind* as to invite women over your house that you do not find attractive. Everyone doesn't have to be best buddies in a community. I think authentic relationships are what's important. Oh, and being a man is too. Stepping up, treating women with respect. Even the *least* of these...
58. Ruthie said the following at 11:49 AM on Oct 23:
#2
First, let me compliment you that you on this idea and the fact that you were willing to include everyone. It shows that your intentions were highly honorable. On the flip side I was rather saddened by the use of phrases such as "bottom of the barrel" and the "spherical and unattractive women". Please remember they are your sisters after all and as someone who has been one of those women it hurts to read such descriptions.
There is not an excuse for any woman not being gracious in refusing an invitation. Period.
I would have been interested in hearing the reasons behind some of the ladies criticisms. Maybe something could be learned that would make both the invitation and execution better. They may not all be negative about the dinner idea but how the whole affair was conducted.
The ladies likewise should have checked their attitudes and hearts before voicing their concerns.
Bottom lines: We all (Women and Men) need to be more open to listening and asking questions from those who bring negative feedback.
59. Scott said the following at 11:58 AM on Oct 23:
Jo [53] wrote:
Of course - I was just pointing out that, contra Lawrence, for instance, this is a gradual (I don't mean long & drawn out) process: flirting, increasingly meaningful convo, then a declaration of interest. Such an approach has nothing to do with 'fear'.
60. tmw said the following at 12:29 PM on Oct 23:
Sunny #57- Well said.
Mike from WI #21- Thank you.
61. Jeni said the following at 12:58 PM on Oct 23:
#21 - Mike, I agree with several above comments: well said!
#25 Craig "The idea that a guy should have any serious idea about whether or not he's going to pursue a woman as his wife BEFORE THE FIRST DATE TAKES PLACE is crazy advice that will result in a lot of single 40-year-old men." I agree and I see that has happened in my circles. By the way, a lot of 40 year old single men result in a lot of 40 year old single women. Seriously, it's okay to take a chance, go out on a first date and maybe even a second date then evaulate if you are interested in persuing an intentional relationship with that person. A date is an opportunity to get to know someone, it's not a marriage proposal.
#2 obewan - well of course you and your housemates are impecable specimans of masculinity. No doubt the most beautiful woman (a supermodel) in your group would have pursued a relationship with you if she had been given the chance.
62. V.V. said the following at 2:17 PM on Oct 23:
I'm really not trying to sound selfish here, but thank GOD I'm getting married in a few days and no longer have to worry about reading between all these lines (I'll have a whole new set of issues to worry about).
Dating was fun, but also a really stressful time in my life - so many choices, so much ambivalence at times. I'm glad I've found the one my heart loves, that God has led us to each other, and that I'm walking down the aisle soon.
63. obewan said the following at 2:29 PM on Oct 23:
#57. Sunny said the following at 11:43 AM on Oct 23:
Obewan,
You must not realize how arrogant you sound. That's unreal. I read your response later in this thread and you still sounded pompous.
-----------------------------------
Sorry if it sounds pompous. Since this is an anonymous blog, I feel more open to state the “unvarnished” truth. Sorry if the facts hurt. I would use a lot more tact communicating the "facts" first hand in person with someone. And, I was not even the one making the decisions about who got invited - I was only the gourmet cook.
Despite the desire of women to be invited on a real date or not at all, my roommates and I agreed that a non-committal meal was the best way to get to know all of the women in our church to see if a dating relationship might become a possibility between any one of us. But the more important goal was to engage in Christian fellowship and to make the women feel appreciated as sisters in the Lord.
We included virtually every young single woman in the church and made that intention well known when extending the invitations and that is what eventually shot us in the foot since we were accused of performing "inspections."
If I was not “arrogant” and had a different approach I might be accused of being “stuck-up”. So, I rest my case in suggesting that with some people the men just can't win. The bottom of the barrel also means we were almost out of eligible women. I mean, the “super model” was also at the “bottom” of the barrel before we stopped the tradition, and, she was more interested in my reputation as a gourmet cook than my “masculinity” as one blogger has joked.
And, BTW, my roommates all ended up dating and eventually married to other women that were from different churches. Even the spherical woman found a husband that loves her for who she is (I am happy to report).
The real conflicts we attempted to diffuse were centered around the fact that the male:female at times approached 12:1 in our church’s young adult singles group due to the presence of a shipyard and the world’s largest submarine base. The women were the ones who were “choosy” and it took a lot of stamina to withstand all the rejections. Having a nice safe environment to view them as sisters really helped me a lot, and it gave me the confidence to begin pursuing more “intentional” relationships with a few of them.
64. Carolyn said the following at 5:37 PM on Oct 23:
it's easy to tell us not to assume it's a date unless that's specified, but...(my situation from earlier this week)
suppose a guy who's 10 years older than you asks you to dinner. You don't know him very well (what was his last name again? where is he from?) You've just been commenting on how free you are (I was excited. it was my first free night in weeks), so you feel like you should probably say yes, since he didn't say it was a date. Suppose he then keeps making numerous comments about how much he enjoys you (I appreciate being able to have intelligent conversation with you...I don't meet many women like you...It's great to finally meet someone who likes X...You have a lovely smile...etc), then insists on paying for your meal, then asks you to sit in his car for awhile to listen to music, but still never clarifies whether it was a date or not. I left that night with the distinct impression I'd just been on a date and an unpleasant foreboding of awkward conversations to come. I'm not worried about my heart here (absolutely 0 interest in more than a friendship with this guy, so I'll be relieved if I find out that's all it was), I'm more worried that I may have been leading him on. And, no, I won't accept any more invitations from him, but it seems this whole assuming guys just want to be friends bites just as often as assuming they want more.
65. Carolyn said the following at 5:42 PM on Oct 23:
I wish guys would just say. Not every situation requires clarification, but one-on-one dinner with the guy inviting and paying is a situation that usually requires clarification. It isn't bad to invite a friend-girl out to hang out and be chivalrous and pick up the tab, but she needs to know that's all you're doing. Or, conversely, because we're used to guys who are just friends doing things like this, we may need told that this is more. sorry we can't read your intentions- what is obviously a date to one guy is obviously just two friends enjoying eachother to another and we might (very likely) misjudge your obvious intents.
66. BDB said the following at 6:33 PM on Oct 23:
There's another way to phrase the boundary:
Say that you only accept dinner invitations from men who are pursuing you for marriage.
And then stop.
But they will likely be so surprised that I hope you will at least sit down with them over a cup of coffee and explain yourself.
Then they can decide. If someone you've said that to only suggests lunch at Subway from then on, you know where he's coming from.
And, after getting to know you, he invites you to dinner...at least you won't have to worry about one of those long, drawn-out dating relationships that goes on for years and years...
67. Mike from WI said the following at 10:18 PM on Oct 23:
In response to some comments on my earlier post #21.
1. I believe a date is a date and we all know it. To try to "decipher" signals about who paid or who didn't about a single meeting/date from the opposite sex, to draw some abstract conclusion about it, is just ridiculous.
Men should always offer to pay, friends or not. Guys if you like the girl, tell her what you like about her, pay for her, then ask her out again. Girls, if you like the guy, tell him, let him pay, then go out again. If you don't like someone, say no, and let it go.
I just don't believe in having fantasy relationships. It either works or doesn't. We're all just over-analyzing it. God changes hearts, man does not.
2. Women have a lot more to lose in relationships. As a man, you're supposed to lead your family, and love your wife as you would yourself. She needs this love from you by nature. You, as a man are to provide it. She is counting on you for it. She has everything to lose (faith, health, family) if you don't provide it. I just think we have a responsibility to take that lead, thats all.
3. And finally, yes past generations lived in a different time with different cultural expectations. But, they still loved and chose to marry. Perhaps they had fewer choices and this made it simpler. But maybe they were more realistic about life.
They "grew up" a lot sooner. By this I mean they took on commitments like careers and marriage, because they knew that is what life is all about. I think we're all just paralyzed by choice and once a tiny adversity shows up we run away. I see a lot of guys in my generation (including myself at one point, I'm 28) guilty of this.
Just stop whining about things that aren't that bad, like girls' rejection, and live your life as a man. In short, man up.
68. John said the following at 1:55 AM on Oct 24:
After reading an article on Boundless: "Dangers of Cash-Based Courtship" by Anne Morse @ http://www.boundless.org/2005/articles/a0000234.cfm
I would strongly urge that people pay for THEIR OWN meals/entertainment. It sounds a bit out there, but when guys are paying for girls meals etc. it is basically like buying their time which is in ways akin to prostitution. I have come up with several other reasons to not pay for eachother that benefit and protect both genders.
As far as platonic relationships go: I think for the most part (w/ the exception of some very precise and not often encountered criteria) they are completely imaginary. A friend of mine and myself concluded that basically there is always someone in the pair that has feelings for the other one despite what they may say. Also, that a platonic relationship is only possible if the two people are completely repulsed by the other one (but they would most certainly not want to associate with eachother than).
69. Laurel said the following at 1:58 AM on Oct 24:
I was strongly leaning toward staying out of this discussion until I read Benjamin’s post #50:
"Wow, I was surprised by Candice's answer on the podcast. For those that haven't listened, a guy asked a girl if she wanted to go to dinner, and at the end the waiter asked "Are you together?", to which he said yes. We have all the makings of a sitcom episode here, he assumed the waiter meant for the purpose of the check (which he paid), she assumed the waiter meant as a couple.
The next time they had dinner together, it sounded like the man went out of his way to clarify that they were just friends and it was not a date. The woman was disappointed. Now this seems like a straightforward misunderstanding, but Candice really laid into the guy as if he had been outright lying instead of simply understanding an innocuous waiter question differently (and probably correctly, since it was a waiter).
It seems like one simple rule would save women all this type of disappointment. Don't assume something is a date unless it is specified as one. How hard is that? It doesn't seem to me like "I wanted this to be a date but it wasn't" deserves much sympathy."
::
My dear friend, that is not 1) what happened, or 2) what Candice/Lisa said. :) Please allow me to set the record straight…
I have learned to not assume a guy is interested in me until he says so. To me. With his mouth. Mostly, I was confused because what my friend was saying was not lining up with what he was doing.
After hanging out several times, one-on-one, at his initiative, we went to lunch (not dinner) together after church. The clerk (Lisa did substitute the word "waiter" on the podcast, but you went somewhere else with it) asked if we were together at the counter, and he said “yes” and paid for us both. I still did not consider it a date until he asked me to dinner -- an intentional and prearranged social engagement, unconnected to any other event, and the fourth time we had done something one-on-one. It was a dinner date, yet in the middle of our conversation, he dropped the “just friends” bomb. That was after he had gone out of his way on multiple occasions to see me, talk with me, hang out with me – in other words, he had flirted with me and pursued me. Was I disappointed? Sure. But I was glad that, finally, SOMEONE had defined SOMETHING.
You said, “We have all the makings of a sitcom episode here.” Actually (can I say this?), we have all the makings of an e-mail forward that no one verified at snopes.com. I’ve been a server for several years, and I understand that just because two checks are combined into one transaction does not mean the couple is, relationally speaking, “together.” I also have at least one male friend who always pays, if he asks, whether it’s a date or not.
All that being said, I’d like to offer a few thoughts to this entire discussion:
1) I grew up on Josh Harris’ writing (thank you Philip/#47 – that is an excellent and freeing podcast!) and have learned that while one thing may be appropriate in your teens (i.e. not dating at ALL), what is appropriate changes in some ways once you’re in your 20s (i.e. being willing to hang out one-on-one with a brother/friend/date). And that’s okay. It can be and can lead to good things… There is a time to kiss dating goodbye, and there is a time to give dating a chance.
2) Candice and Lisa correctly identified that my question was not about money; it was about clarity. What makes things very confusing/frustrating is when it looks like a date, it feels like a date, you’ve done enough things one-on-one that your friends are beginning to ask if you’re dating, and yet suddenly IT’S NOT A DATE. I appreciate Candice and Lisa’s answers and agree that female boldness is called for. We need to be ready and willing to ask for clarity.
3) A number of people in this discussion are wanting rules -- black and white guidelines which, if always followed, are guaranteed to lead to a significant relationship and/or a happy marriage. (Granted, my original inbox question was also asking for a guideline.) But, really? I continue to learn that living by faith means being willing to live in the grey, which is somewhere between the black and the white. It’s harder to live there, but it’s better to live there. That’s where our relationship with God comes in because we HAVE to rely on Him and we HAVE to ask Him to give us wisdom… Sure, certain Biblical principles NEED to stand, regardless of majority. And Proverbs advises seeking out wise counselors (i.e. Boundless). But if we are wise, we will also be wary of shielding ourselves from the cold with blanket statements…
4) I‘ve learned to be comfortable with and to enjoy hanging out with Christian guy friends from time to time (who have not first dropped the knee and held up a ring – please hear my humor/sarcasm). I agree with those who’ve posted here that there needs to be some flexibility in the “getting-to-know-each-other” stage. Flirting is fun. ;) But repeated flirting and pursuit should eventually be backed up with something… and both guys and girls need to call it (AND act like) what it is or isn’t. Tami/#52 is right on. So is BDB/#15. Also, when something goes one-on-one, it does up the ante. If a guy isn’t sure if he wants to pursue a girl, a great way to find out is to organize group events including her.
5) I respect guys who are doing their best to be gentlemen, including paying for girls, whether it’s a date or not. But unless the relationship is 110% clearly platonic, that’s just confusing for us girls. Elisabeth Elliot is (see BDB/#13) right. If it’s not a date, generally speaking, it keeps things much clearer to split the check. Note: a guy can split the check with a “sister” and still be a gentleman in other ways. Clarity is more of a gift to her than paying the entire bill would ever be.
70. Jo said the following at 2:49 AM on Oct 24:
BDB 66:
"Say that you only accept dinner invitations from men who are pursuing you for marriage."
Eek. I think a lot of decent, marriage-minded guys would be freaked out by that. I don't expect a man to be 'pursuing me for marriage' on the first date. I expect that he won't have counted me out and will be wanting to get to know me better to see if he wants to pursue me - but I think your phrase is a little too strong.
And also, if you're gonna say that, it has to be true. Which it wouldn't be, for me. *shrugs*
71. Anstice said the following at 4:36 AM on Oct 24:
Another aspect of the clarity situation is gifts: It concerns me when men give their girlfriends a ring but it's "not an engagement ring". Then what in heaven's name is it?? This seems to me to be a complete blurring of lines, and totally unnecessary. If you must give her jewellery (and even that, in my opinion, is only appropriate if you are intending to propose marriage) please make it a necklace or a bracelet. Of course, you could also put it the other way and say a woman should only accept jewellery from a man if she is willing to marry him. But perhaps I'm old fashioned.
72. Kelly-1 said the following at 7:14 AM on Oct 24:
Scott - #49 - I admire you for asking out the girl you liked (and it's a shame she didn't feel the same way). I just wanted to try and explain her responses.
The first time, she turned you down, but there was no real way to know that. The second time she said no (even before you asked her if you should pursue her or not), that was a definite "no, never". If a woman likes someone, she will clear her schedule for a guy. One turn-down may mean she honestly has something on that she can't change (but she'll usually apologise for it). A second "no" means a definite no.
As for the "don't date guys from work" line, I've used that myself. We think of it as saving (him) embarrassment, trying to let the guy down gently, wanting to make him feel like he's a good guy but it just won't work.
It's just the way the genders are different. Women feel de-valued if they hear a flat-out No, so they assume men will feel hurt in the same manner. So we try to make the message nicer. Whereas men are perfectly fine with a No (I've learnt this over the years!) but if you said that to a woman, she would be very hurt.
73. Natalie said the following at 8:41 AM on Oct 24:
#66 BDB said: "There's another way to phrase the boundary:
Say that you only accept dinner invitations from men who are pursuing you for marriage."
*I like this idea, there's no room for gray area here. I think sometimes we women are plagued with such a stark dating life that even an unclear invitation is better than nothing. But in order to encourage men to truly take the lead, we must, as women, have higher expecations of them and with consistency.
74. Scott said the following at 11:41 AM on Oct 24:
Mike from WI [67] wrote:
What do you base this statement on?
Mike from WI [67] wrote:
First, your original comment was specifically about dating relationships:
Your present comment has to do with marriage. Neither men nor women have spousal - much less parental - obligations to one another until marriage. I'm not sure how this supports your initial contention that women have more to lose in dating relationships.
Second (in regard to marriage), given rampant divorce rates, men are at just as much at risk of losing everything (including faith, health, family) as are women.
75. Scott said the following at 11:56 AM on Oct 24:
Kelly-1 wrote:
I pretty much knew that, but I was looking for clarity, that's why I followed up with the second question.
I can sympathize, but this is where it's a bit frustrating. So often I hear women (as here) pleading for guys to be bold or clear about their intentions, etc. Yet, they seem to be loathe to live up to this standard themselves. I know it's uncomfortable having to reject someone, but no one ever let's us guys off the hook with that excuse. If you're going to expect clarity, you need to be offering it up yourself.
Guys, as often as girls, second guess themselves all the time - we can't read your mind. Use those fabled communication skills to verbalize what you mean. :-)
76. BDB said the following at 9:47 PM on Oct 24:
Jo (#70) wrote:
>>"Say that you only accept dinner invitations from men who are pursuing you for marriage."
Eek. I think a lot of decent, marriage-minded guys would be freaked out by that.<<
Only need one.
But remember, my recommended policy is have lunch and/or coffee with everyone. So, for those who want to limit access to their time, I'm making another suggestion on how they can segment out dinner.
Personally, I've reached the conclusion that the root cause of the divorce rate in America is dating. That's because people attempt to build their relationship in entertainment settings. They ASSUME everything will fall into place operationally after marriage. When it doesn't, half decide they made a mistake and eventually bail.
If you listen to the quarrels of married people who end up getting divorced, they are often about how time and money are being used. The management of time and money are operational concerns.
Elisabeth Elliot points out, correctly, that in most of the history of the world, people got married and founded families without anything resembling "dating." It is definitely not a necessary part of approaching marriage. It is a cultural expectation in wealthy Western countries. But there certainly isn't any Biblical requirement.
So, for those who are terribly concerned about being sucked into an ambiguous relationship, set a firm boundary. If you've got some friends you hang out with in a group, and go to lunch after church, etc. etc., maybe eventually someone invites you to a one-on-one dinner. If you reserve dinner for people who are sincere about marriage, it's a very specific boundary. They can choose to limit it to lunch and stay friends.
Personally, I don't accept ANY invitation from a woman who I wouldn't consider marrying. I have misgivings about accepting for others, and on more than one occasion I somehow ended up paying. Sometimes they're too quick for me and it ends up being one of those thing where we alternate. With coffee this is not a big deal.
Finally, I think of coffee and lunch as networking opportunities. Even if it is just with friends, the other person may KNOW someone suitable for you. A vast number of marriages have taken place where people went out as friends and later on introduced them to their future spouse. Women should accept the one lunch invitations from the man they're not really interested in just in case he realizes, "Hey, I know someone who thinks the same way as her."
77. BDB said the following at 9:59 PM on Oct 24:
Laurel (#69) wrote:
>>Tami/#52 is right on. So is BDB/#15.<<
Whew!
**wipes brow
Sometimes I forget that the people who submit questions might be reading the comments.
78. Rebekah in Socsl said the following at 11:06 PM on Oct 24:
You know, as a single woman, I wouldn't risk going out one-on-one with a guy friend. I would hate for someone else who might be interested in me to think that I'm unavailable.
I spent most of my college years unknowingly telling the other guys that I was taken, b/c my closest friend/study partner (we always had a class or two together) was a guy. I never lacked clarity on the relationship, but I looked taken--I know, a guy told me this later.
79. Jordanne said the following at 12:37 AM on Oct 25:
this was quite a while ago, but Jeremiah (number 4)... you just made my day! Hahahaha oh raft guides. My boyfriend and I both raft guide, and trust me. You're right (myself and better half excluded).
80. edwige said the following at 2:43 PM on Oct 25:
# 2 obewan >>... we even invited the spherical and unattractive women<<
this made me smile u know...but more of a sad smile... I wish u added unattractive to you or to you and your friends cos they might have been attractive to other people...
81. Lis said the following at 5:21 PM on Oct 25:
if a guy asked a girl out to dinner, why would anyone NOT think of it as a date? i don't blame a girl for being frustrated and upset if a guy does that.
82. Kyra said the following at 5:29 PM on Oct 25:
Oh, I have to agree completely on the whole "do not ask a friend out to dinner" thing. And I'm someone who routinely used to have one-on-one dinners with guy friends during college. Mainly because they offered to pay, I was broke, and I didn't have many female friends. Now as an adult, I would do things differently.
What I'm about to say may get a few eye rolls but I feel like I can say it since I'm a woman. GENERALLY SPEAKING, women tend to over-analyze and obsess over a man's words, behavior or intentions way more than a man does over a woman's.
I think any dinner that consists of two people of the opposite sex is a very "date-like" scenario, even if it occurs at McDonald's, and tbe bill is split, and they are "just friends".
Even though I've had lots of meals with guy friends where those misunderstandings didn't occur, I've also had the kind of crushes to the extent that, had one of those guys asked me out to dinner alone, I would have thought "wow, that's a date, he must be in love with me!" (maybe that's just me, I don't know...) There have also been a couple times when I've had to contend with mixed messages I've sent to men whom I had no idea were interested in me as more than a friend.
The main points being:
1) when hanging out with friends of the opposite sex you really should make every effort to do it as a group instead of one-on-one.
2) there are so many gray areas between "friendship" and "relationship" that we owe it to ourselves and one another to define the lines more clearly as opposed to just hanging out in the gray areas.
still not convinced? Try to imagine one of your parents routinely going out to dinner with a "friend" of the opposite sex. Doesn't that seem innapropriate to you? As singles who will someday be married, we should conduct ourselves in the same manner.
83. Mike from WI said the following at 6:19 PM on Oct 25:
Scott #74, with all due respect to you personally, I think you're completely wrong in your opinion.
The point of dating is to show women what kind of a man we are and give them an idea of what life would be like if we were married.
Our obligations are to lead (i.e. ask them out to date), provide (i.e. offer to pay), and protect and respect their character. Now I'm not married, but I really don't see how anything we are obligated as men to respect during dating, changes once we're married. Do you?
In fact, I think when we as men treat dating relationships as halfway commitments, it causes all of this confusion of our motives among women, (i.e. are you really a good guy, or just trying to use me).
Now, one date does not a marriage make. But, you gotta show women who you are and what kind of man you are. There are simple things, during dating, like asking women out, admiring their best qualities, and paying for the meal, that we can do to show what kind man we are and what kind of husband we will be.
As to your other point, my basis is anecdotal at best. I've just observed many more women suffer in terms of faith, family, and health, when relationships fail. Don't know if there are actual studies on this or if its a result of our Creation, but just my observation.
84. Jeremy said the following at 6:40 PM on Oct 25:
I'm kind of annoyed by the trend towards guys/girls going out to dinner et cetera as "just friends" even if it is well defined before hand for this reason: imagine if it became common occurrence for guys to give roses to girls they were just friends with...the act of giving flowers would completely lose all romantic value. Obviously this hasn't happened with giving flowers, but it seems like it's happened with a whole bunch of other things that used to communicate some sort of romantic message. If I'm going through the effort of spending time with a girl, asking her out to dinner, the movies et cetera, all because I like her and 5 other guys are doing all the same things but they're only trying to be friends with her- it devalues the effort I'm trying to put in to say "I like you, I want to be in a relationship with you."
So for my sake and the sake of all guys who actually care about the girls you're spending all this time with as "friends" please stop. =P my 2 cents.
~Jeremy
85. d said the following at 8:06 PM on Oct 25:
@obewan (57)
Twice! called out as arrogant. so I'm not the only one you rub the wrong way.
EVERY woman is made in the image of God, and simply because they don't meet your narrow, self-congratulatory standards of beauty does NOT make her "bottom of the barrel" NOR "even" (what a despicable word) ugly NOR unattractive. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and if it's ugliness that's going out ("ah, she disgusts her anyway, but I'm an equal opportunity offender, so I'll fulfill my Christian/manly duty and invite her anyway) then it's NO WONDER you get the lashback you have from women, not only on this entry but on the other blog entry.
Christianity is not a faith based on contempt, degradation, and inequality (ALL have fallen short, ALL are children of God). Obewan, you do a disservice to Christ's name with your distasteful posts. It's not only you, but you happen to post sooner than most so I address you on behalf of all the others out there who think it's godly and acceptable to unfavorably rank your fellow man.
86. Scott said the following at 8:28 PM on Oct 25:
Mike from WI [83]
A husbands obligation to his wife is far greater than mine to a date's, no? You wrote:
Sure, I need to show her what 'kind of man' I am by doing things like asking. paying for the date, and respecting her. No, that doesn't change with marriage, in fact I take on responsibilities I didn't as an unmarried man. The above points in bold, for instance. Yes, my conduct while dating should demonstrate that I am prepared to take on such responsibility, but that's different than actually doing so.
Even granting your point for the sake of argument, how does that demonstrate that women have more to lose while dating?
87. obewan said the following at 6:36 AM on Oct 26:
#85. d said the following at 8:06 PM on Oct 25:
@obewan (57)
Twice! called (sic) out as arrogant. so (sic) I'm not the only one you rub the wrong way.
------------------------------------
Twice in 242 comments amounts to 8 tenths of 1 percent as far as opinion polls!
I think the sentiment I posted is the prevailing opinion of most singles. I mean it is not my opinion of the self worth of those women, but it does reflect their attractiveness to me in terms of selecting them as a mate.
I posted the unvarnished truth that might only be spoken in an anonymous blog. I am sure I am judged by the same standards by many women. I am not arrogant about my "appearance". You may say that I am "stuck up" if you choose, and that is something between myself and the Lord that I am prayerfully dealing with and I mean that sincerely.
I mean, in my present situation I have encountered both attractive and unattractive women who are strong Christians who have shown an interest in getting to know me, and given that I have an option, it is difficult to force a romantic interest in the latter. Only the Lord can change the reality of how I feel romantically in terms of attraction and that is truly something I am praying about.
And, if you read my most recent prior post you will see that I explained that we were at the end of the list of single women in our church – bottom of the barrel literally meant just that – out of options. There was a supermodel that was also at the bottom of the barrel and she never got an invitation.
Why don’t you attack others who include physical attraction in their criteria for romantic attraction?
88. Amir Larijani said the following at 8:24 AM on Oct 26:
"Spherical"? Never heard that one before!
In all seriousness, Obewan, I didn't know this thread was about the fighting over "attractiveness", so why introduce that to the discussion?
Moreover, while I think the gals overreacted--from what you described, it seemed like a good faith effort to reach out--I can also understand why they reached the conclusion that they reached.
Even so, both sides need to take a chill pill. Most of us here want the same thing; as--in my interactions on this blog space--I've not noticed very many men or women who aspire to remain single.
In fact, I'd venture to say that at least 95% of the Christian respondents here want to get married.
Are there irresponsible "Christian" men who are porn addicts, and/or who play the field, and/or don't take care of themselves, and/or don't go to church, and/or who don't aspire to the responsibilities of adulthood, and/or who only try to pursue the "attractive women"? No question.
Are there irresponsible "Christian" women who are bulimic, and/or who let their health go to pot, and/or play men like tools, and/or pass up Christian single men for nonbelievers, and/or are drama queens? Absolutely.
Still, I'd venture to say that most Christian respondents are middle-of-the-road, are otherwise responsible Christians, who--for whatever struggles they have--are living lives reflective of sanctification.
So, why don't some of you folks do some networking and get to know each other?
I'm not being flippant by any stretch.
Other religious communities--especially Jews--are experts in networking people all over the globe. If I'm a Rabbi in Philadelphia and have a good gal in my synagogue, all I have to do is call a colleague in Los Angeles, who knows a family who has a fine man in their community, and get the families in touch, and voila!
Why can't Christians--especially with the Internet, and with groups such as Boundless (who are pro-marriage)--engage in the same networking?
89. Amy Lauren Scoggin said the following at 8:38 AM on Oct 26:
Obewan,
I think you're hilarious. You're funny, and obviously you're very intelligent. While this is absolutely true, some of the "harsh" things you're say may just not be entirely beneficial. While I agree with the *idea* of almost everything you've said, maybe you should consider being a little softer.
If you're hoping to make a difference and really offer a gripping evidence to a different idea than posted, you have to communicate respect so that people will be willing to listen.
If you just want to be amusing (which I think you are...but, I think some people are genuinely offended) then, as my Nana would say, "Keep on keepin' on!"
-Amy
90. obewan said the following at 12:46 PM on Oct 26:
Thanks Amy for the good advice. I think I am a bit out of character being that I can hide behind this blog, but I suppose that does not give me the right to say hurtful things. And as the saying goes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. In High School, I had a crush on a young woman that years later I viewed as downright homely after the fact...so there is something to be said for chemistry too and it is not always based upon "good looks" I suppose.
91. Amy Lauren Scoggin said the following at 6:07 PM on Oct 26:
What wonderful humility you've exhibited! Thank you. You've just proven a couple of folks wrong.
And as far as what you said about chemistry, it's true. But I definitely think girls (because we are much less visual than men) are more likely to look past appearances. While of course the way a person looks is the first thing one notices (usually), I know that personally I look beyond that pretty quickly. Does that mean I don't sometimes have some really silly objections to a man? Certainly not. But are appearances important to me? Beyond things that are a result of a lack of reasonably caring for one's body, I can honestly say no.
As far as the topic at hand is considered (the dinner-date thing) I agree with what Joshua Harris says in his "Courtship Shmourtship" sermon. It shouldn't be the end of the world to eat dinner together. However, I think context should be taken into consideration. Is it wrong to be treated by a gentleman friend to a yummy dinner of Chinese food at the local take-out/eat-in place? Definitely not, and I don't think girls should assume that it's time to pick out wedding invitations.
However, I do have a little qualm with guys bringing a girl to a really nice restaurant (I'm talking $60+ for two, possibly less depending on circumstances) does give her the impression that not only is the outing a "Date", but it insinuates a bit of commitment. I can just see the girls talking the next day, "He spent that much on you?! Wow! He must be really serious -- he wouldn't do that with just a friend."
Again, I'm not saying it's okay. I just know that that's how many women would interpret the situation. That's why communication is so important. :)
92. Trisha said the following at 6:31 PM on Oct 27:
So are you saying a female and male can't hang out as just friends as in a plunotic relationship? If so, I disagree.
93. Andrea-Elena said the following at 8:13 PM on Oct 27:
Trisha,
I think you mean platonic.
And it might benefit you to do more digging into what Boundless has historically said about male-female friendships. The Boundless bloggers have not ever said, to my knowledge, that men and women cannot and should not be platonic friends at all. It's about how close they get, especially without clarity about each other's intentions and hopes for the friendship. Many folks, not all, have found that opposite-sex friendships that get into "confidant" territory are just untenable (and even unwise). Some people can have these sorts of friendships and have little to no trouble. But as I have observed, that seems to be pretty rare. Not impossible, but just rare.
94. Anna (not Banana) said the following at 8:45 AM on Oct 30:
As far as friends doing dating-like things on a regular basis I think people need to be cautious and very discerning. I’m sure we have all witnessed, if not experienced, those “just friends” situations in which one party is secretly hoping for more. The fact that you have known each other your whole lives or are study buddies or have had the “just-friends” conversation before doesn’t necessarily mean that the other person’s heart is not in play. And no, it may not be your responsibility to make sure that other person never gets hurt. But if you’re really as good friends as you think you are, I imagine you would want to be careful. And if you’re trying to be responsible and express your lack of romantic feelings so that you’re both clear, a date-like dinner setting might not be the best place to do that.
And if you really are no-romantic-feelings-involved just friends, do you want to get married? Because if so, it’s still don’t think it’s a good idea to monopolize each other’s time, making that person appear taken or filling up evenings that could be used for real dates. Just yesterday I had a friend ask me about a guy she was interested in.
Friend: My heart dropped when he walked in with that girl. Is that his girlfriend?
Me: I don’t think so. I thought that at first, too. But I’ve know them for a while and they’ve never mentioned being a couple.
Friend: Because he said she cuts his hair. And who other than a girlfriend would do that?
Me: I don’t know…but I’m sure they’re just friends…pretty sure…
Her: But you see how they interact. They look really, really close…
Me: Yeah. They, really do.
95. Leyla Valois said the following at 2:55 PM on Oct 30:
I'm a tomboy and I have more guy friends than I do girl friends. My guy friends are like brothers to me and (like I would with my real brother) I wouldn't think twice of going out to dinner with a guy friend. And I would NEVER assume it was a date. Maybe I'm a rare case, like you say, but maybe women should re-evaluate their expectations.
I don't at all see a problem with men and women being friends and having dinner together, but it doesn't work for everyone. If she's a boy-crazy girl, then I wouldn't recommend it because it might give her the wrong idea.
But as long as you have the DTR (Defining the Relationship) talk beforehand, it shouldn't be an issue. I mean, c'mon, not every guy that talks to you is going to want to marry you. Grow up, ladies.
96. Madeline said the following at 3:52 PM on Oct 30:
I think this is kind of silly advice. As a young woman I have many close male friends...we go to dinner all the time, we are friends! Now,if one of my friends started paying for dinner, I would think it is weird, but we are just hanging out. Guys and girls can be friends. I had a best friend who was a guy for many years. He is now married and I am engaged.