Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
Here’s a tip: you’re at the bar, you see a girl, which is more appropriate? Starting a conversation, picking up the signal that she too is interested, and then complimenting her bum? Or walking up to her and complimenting her bum? Number one is clearly the more appropriate way to handle flirting, but I would be concerned if saying “don’t do the second one” seems sexually repressive. The key is to figure out what kind of relationship and understanding you’re in with this person, BEFORE you make sexually suggestive comments.
|
Sure. This is a nuanced, common sense approach. In other words, this is good advice for that situation. The problem I see - well, one of a number of problems - is the oversimplification of complex human interactions that are based on unexpressed signals. When you take good advice like the above, and reduce it to "never make a comment to someone you're sexually attracted to unless you'd also make it to someone you weren't sexually attracted to", not only is that unrealistic and facile, it's quintessentially repressive. It treats sexual attraction as some bugbear we should all be constantly on guard against. That in itself is something not to take lightly.
More important still, it's easier to demonize, broad-brush and scapegoat than it is to actually understand complex human behaviour. People are constantly looking for simple answers on moral issues - the mob gets carried away rather than reflecting on the various shades of gray (pun not intended) inherent in what we're discussing, which is probably the most agnoized-about subject in human history besides "why are we here".
But like I say, this whole discussion is so charged and moralistic, rather than actually participate fully in the various aspects that could found the basis of an interesting conversation, I think I'm just going to stick with the woods.