awkward situation

LegacyUser

I would really appreciate your help, I have been working in my current job for a couple of years, it is a very small company so there is no HR department. I was on very good terms with a very senior person in my field, he is a man who is held in high regard by everyone in my field of work, is known for being a family man (he has several children and a lovely wife) and also for being very religious, anti-divorce etc.

In fact, I and every woman I know who has met him or had to deal with him over the years would describe him as a totally gentleman, very funny, entertaining and well mannered. However my opinion changed drastically during the summer when on a night out he made some very inappropriate comments/suggestions of a sexual nature towards me. I was in utter shock to say the least he was the last man on earth I honestly thought would cheat (I know I might sound naive but I am being honest), I was so shocked I couldn't speak thankfully some of the people we were out with came back over and when he suggested we leave together I managed to stammer a no. After that I avoided him for the rest of the night and just put it down to him having to much to drink because until that point we had got on incredible well.

In the months that have preceded the incident everything has been fine between us and he was back to acting like the usually gentleman that everybody expects. However in the last month or so the odd comment has been slipped into conversations re: having affairs. Unfortunately we are heading out for dinner and work drinks for christmas in a much smaller group and he is attending and I am dreading that he may try something on with me again.

I also should point out that this man is one of my bosses best friend who he and everyone else holds in incredibly high regard and that if it came down to a question of who to believe than his word would win out over mine. I should also let you know that I am way down the rung in my profession where he is at the very top of it and could potentially do a lot of harm to me. I should also point out that there is a substantially age difference of about 20 years between the two of us.

I honestly have no idea how to deal with the situation in a tactful and mature fashion without hurting his ego and ruining our professional relationship and would sincerely appreciate your help and suggestions.

tbh

tbh, I'm surprised I'm surprised you're concerned about not hurting his ego, but either way, this should be very simple - in theory - to stop. The next time he says anything, just say - firmly and clearly - nothing is ever going to happen, and I don't want you to raise the subject again, ok?

he's in the wrong here, it's not right that he should have to be told, but obviously he does. You're just going to have to stand up to him. And if you tell him and he doesn't respect that, don't threaten to tell his wife - just tell her.

either he genuinely likes you and thinks something can happen, or he thinks your a mouse and he can pester you into sex - it's up to you to show him he's picked the wrong girl in either case.

Nevyn

Just try and make sure that you are not alone with him and if that does happen and his tune changes excuse yourself and leave.

JonathanAnon

tbh wrote: »

And if you tell him and he doesn't respect that, don't threaten to tell his wife - just tell her.

Under no circumstances should you tell his wife. Their marriage has nothing to do with you and you have no right to ruin it, even if he is being an asshole. People will lose respect for you if you do this.

As was said above, he is in the wrong, so you have no reason to care about
his ego. If he tries it on, just tell him that you respect him as a colleague, but that you have NO interest in him outside of a working relationship. Stand up for yourself, but be polite. If in the future he does try to take revenge on you "professionally", you can always get another job somewhere else.

tbh

JonathanAnon wrote: »

Under no circumstances should you tell his wife. Their marriage has nothing to do with you and you have no right to ruin it, even if he is being an asshole. People will lose respect for you if you do this.

As was said above, he is in the wrong, so you have no reason to care about
his ego. If he tries it on, just tell him that you respect him as a colleague, but that you have NO interest in him outside of a working relationship. Stand up for yourself, but be polite. If in the future he does try to take revenge on you "professionally", you can always get another job somewhere else.

she should tell his wife if he persists, I said. And if he does, why shouldn't she tell the wife? All she cares about is stopping this guy coming on to her - let him deal with the repercussions. She's not saying anything that isn't true. The marraige is already ruined, he ruined it - it's just the wife doesn't know yet.

Senna

If you are out for dinner or drinks with other workers and him, you could always bring up the topic of affairs, there are a number of ways you can bring up a topic without looking like you want that topic discussed.
Anyway, you could strongly voice your negative views on it and maybe throw a glance at him, just enough to let him know you are looking at him.
If he is smart he'll get the message and you wont have to speak with him one on one about it.

Sam Vimes

tbh wrote: »

she should tell his wife if he persists, I said. And if he does, why shouldn't she tell the wife? All she cares about is stopping this guy coming on to her - let him deal with the repercussions. She's not saying anything that isn't true. The marraige is already ruined, he ruined it - it's just the wife doesn't know yet.

Remember that this is a very well respected guy at the top rung of a profession that she's at the bottom of. In all likelihood she'll have some repercussions of her own.

And she's already said that stopping him coming onto her is not all she cares about. She wants to do it without damaging her career

Sir Humphrey

JonathanAnon wrote: »

Under no circumstances should you tell his wife. Their marriage has nothing to do with you and you have no right to ruin it, even if he is being an asshole. People will lose respect for you if you do this.

Very true. There is also the likelihood that the wife and work colleagues might not believe the story and put it down to the yarn of
some disaffected employee. It is amazing the interpretations people can concoct when they don't want to believe something.

Telling the wife is the nuclear option - something that maybe you can hold over his head in a crisis situation but an option which will bring at least as much if not more damage to the OP than it inflicts on others, and as such is unusable, at least until you get to a stage where you have nothing to lose and do it simply out of vindictiveness.

LegacyUser

Thank you for your replies, but honestly don't think his wife would believe me and even if she did, I do not think she would leave, they have several children together and she is very religious so am pretty sure she would stand by him and even if I thought she would leave I have no desire to be party to ruining a family either even though I know it would be his own fault.

In relation to changing jobs, I have spent several years studying for my particular profession and while I can change the particular company I work for I will still have to deal with this particular person on a regular basis and that's why I want to keep things as civil as possible.

I have also made my feelings clear about affairs, cheating etc on a number of occasions and that's what made his attempts all the more shocking as he really ought to have know how I would feel about this.

SpookyDoll

I honestly have no idea how to deal with the situation in a tactful and mature fashion without hurting his ego and ruining our professional relationship and would sincerely appreciate your help and suggestions.

Fcuk his ego girl. What do you care.

Take your phone and get to know how to use the sound record function on it. Have it ready, there is usually a button on the side you can descretely activate the sound record function. So if he does start going in the wrong direction with the conversation record him, after you have done it simply smile and say "aw how sweet, Ive recorded that for posterity" and watch as the blood drains from his ........face or whereever.

Seriously OP, dont be intimidated about all this rank and bull, you dont have to take this crap. Dont be wishy washy with him, be firm and if he pushes it eyeball him and make clear you have a voice recording of him and you can email it to EVERYONE if he doesnt back the hell off.

Sir Humphrey

The activity proposed in the last post is also illegal if push comes to shove so be wary of trying any such stunt that may well work spiffingly in a soap opera but can have unintended consequences in the real world.

Also, handle with care any advice on these kind of matters from anyone in the sisterhood who adresses you as "girl" before offering it. It might be better treated more delicately than just reading him your rights.

JonathanAnon

SpookyDoll wrote: »

Take your phone and get to know how to use the sound record function on it. Have it ready, there is usually a button on the side you can descretely activate the sound record function.

Oh look OP, you can take the view that "all men are bastards", and do him over rightly for the women's lib movement. But I've been to a lot of christmas parties, and the women and men are EQUALLY bad. I am always shocked by how people openly risk everything for one party. Christmas parties are ridiculously dangerous.

At the end of the day, you have NOTHING to gain out of this situation, and you will be judged by your actions. Recording him is childish if you are going to use it for the purpose of blackmailing him with it. He will likely tell everyone and you will be considered a snake. It may be handy to record the conversation in cognito in the context of having proof in case he tries to create difficulty for you professionally. However, it will not stand up in a court of law. Similarly, telling his wife is not your right. You will be splitting up his family and everybody will know what you have done.

It's simple. If he says anything inappropriate, be strong and firm in telling him to leave you alone.

Hobart

Sir Humphrey wrote: »

The activity proposed in the last post is also illegal if push comes to shove so be wary of trying any such stunt that may well work spiffingly in a soap opera but can have unintended consequences in the real world.

Totally BS. It is not illegal to record him hassling you. You would be precluded from using it a court, if you did not have his consent to record however.

I would record this guy, 100%. For a number of reasons. These things normally end in a very nasty way, with you being the one to loose out. He is abusing his power, and if you continue to resist his advances, it could end up with your life being made so awful that you will want to leave. You should have a reason not to leave. I'm not saying blackmail the guy, but I would let him know, if he comes onto you, that you are recording this, after the fact. It takes guts, but I would strongly recommend you do it.

SpookyDoll

Also, handle with care any advice on these kind of matters from anyone in the sisterhood who adresses you as "girl" before offering it

No need to be so venemous and patronising, also jumping to a few conclusions there, so relax, Im the furthest thing from "Millie Tant" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millie_Tant) you will ever meet!!!

For the record, I dont agree with telling his wife either.

He will likely tell everyone and you will be considered a snake..

I doubt it, why would he want to risk exposing himself !!! But I dont know if it is "illegal" to record someone in this situation, I think that may be a slight exaggeration. Its hardly state secrets, its a pervy aul fella trying to get a bit of a naiive young one at work.

It's simple. If he says anything inappropriate, be strong and firm in telling him to leave you alone.

Yeh, to be fair thats true.

Sir Humphrey

Hobart wrote: »

Totally BS. It is not illegal to record him hassling you. You would be precluded from using it a court, if you did not have his consent to record however.

I would record this guy, 100%. For a number of reasons. These things normally end in a very nasty way, with you being the one to loose out. He is abusing his power, and if you continue to resist his advances, it could end up with your life being made so awful that you will want to leave. You should have a reason not to leave. I'm not saying blackmail the guy, but I would let him know, if he comes onto you, that you are recording this, after the fact. It takes guts, but I would strongly recommend you do it.

It is illegal to use a recording to blackmail somebody which is - and had you read my post in its context you'd have seen this - as I put it "the activity proposed (or at least clearly implied) in the previous post".

I am agog at your ability to say in your second paragraph that you are not saying "blackmail the guy" while at the same time saying exactly that without using the word 'blackmail'.

SpookyDoll

ok you got me there, I hadnt thought of it like that, but you are right.

I retract that advice to the OP!

Hobart

Sir Humphrey wrote: »

It is illegal to use a recording to blackmail somebody which is - and had you read my post in its context you'd have seen this - as I put it "the activity proposed (or at least clearly implied) in the previous post".

I am agog at your ability to say in your second paragraph that you are not saying "blackmail the guy" while at the same time saying exactly that without using the word 'blackmail'.

Without trying to steer this topic more off subject, you are talking hogwash tbh (believe me, I know).

Spookydoll does not mention blackmail (the post you quoted in your reply). To blackmail somebody is to demand something in return for not revealing something in return. Blackmail is illegal, under Irish Statute CJA Sections 71, 72, 73 (2006) can be taken into consideration. Bottom line....nobody is advocating blackmail.

Your ascertain that "The activity proposed in the last post is also illegal if push comes to shove so be wary of trying any such stunt that may well work spiffingly in a soap opera but can have unintended consequences in the real world" is total B.S TBH.

For example, while it is unlawful to record material and play it back for salacious reasons, it is perfectly legal (within this jurisdiction) to record those people whose behavior you believe would lead them to commit a crime, or to whom you believe are about to commit a crime. There are also exceptions for other things, and they all come under privacy legislation, and mostly cover the publishing industry.

But, just for a second think about what you are saying. If one could not record a person without their prior agreement, why do we have so many security cameras around the country? Why have so many of those cameras got mikes attached? How do security firms in stores operate, if you are not allowed to record somebody without their knowledge?

Again, I see no intention nor drive to blackmail this guy, what this girl wants is to be left alone and to get on with her life. While there is no specific legislation against bullying, there have been a number of cases taken under the Industrial Relations Acts, (1946-2001), and in a number of cases recorded information (without the prior knowledge of the perpetrator) has been used.

Again my advice would be, record this guy making his advances. Let him know that you have recorded this. Get on with your job. If your job/circumstances of employment change, go see a solicitor.

Aloysius Flyte

I think some people are getting ahead of themselves.

I understand your pain, your shock. It must be awful to find out that someone who had so much respect for is really, well, a dirty old man and that someone who maybe "had it all", well is a bit greedy!
That's not nice for someone to have to come to terms with, but you have to think about yourself in this situation.

No talk about blackmail, or anything like that, but I'd be bloody careful. He's at the top of his game and there is a recession out there and could make life difficult for you. What I'd do is if you get into a situation where it potentially might get "uncomfortable" talk about your new boyfriend, real or imagineary, flatter his ego, but be firm. Whatever you do, in your rejection of him, don't be disapproving, you need to keep him on side. And in the meantime, see what you can do about getting yourself another job as soon as possible and make sure you leave with a glowing reference.
What a horrible situation to be in. Hope it all goes ok.

St Bill

Unregistered wrote: »

In fact, I and every woman I know who has met him or had to deal with him over the years would describe him as a totally gentleman, very funny, entertaining and well mannered. However my opinion changed drastically during the summer when on a night out he made some very inappropriate comments/suggestions of a sexual nature towards me.

I honestly have no idea how to deal with the situation in a tactful and mature fashion without hurting his ego and ruining our professional relationship and would sincerely appreciate your help and suggestions.

OP, I'd bet that this is not the first time he's done something like this. He's relying on his outward identity to give him the freedom to do whatever he pleases. He's a pure scumbag, he's using his position of authority to take advantage of you.
First of all, record any incidences and what was said.Tell him that you do not find his behaviour acceptable (if he carries on, tell him that you will report him). If you follow the proper channels, your complaint will be treated very seriously.
You say that he would be described as a man who's well mannered and of good standing within the company. In your posts, you come across as very measured and forward thinking, so I would be very surprised if your colleagues did not think that you are also well mannered and of good standing.
It takes just one person to voice what everybody else is probably already thinking (the story of the Emperor's New Clothes springs to mind!), don't let this idiot get away with his butter-wouldn't-melt routine.

Sir Humphrey

Hobart wrote: »

Without trying to steer this topic more off subject, you are talking hogwash tbh (believe me, I know).

Spookydoll does not mention blackmail (the post you quoted in your reply). To blackmail somebody is to demand something in return for not revealing something in return. Blackmail is illegal, under Irish Statute CJA Sections 71, 72, 73 (2006) can be taken into consideration. Bottom line....nobody is advocating blackmail.

Your ascertain that "The activity proposed in the last post is also illegal if push comes to shove so be wary of trying any such stunt that may well work spiffingly in a soap opera but can have unintended consequences in the real world" is total B.S TBH.

For example, while it is unlawful to record material and play it back for salacious reasons, it is perfectly legal (within this jurisdiction) to record those people whose behavior you believe would lead them to commit a crime, or to whom you believe are about to commit a crime. There are also exceptions for other things, and they all come under privacy legislation, and mostly cover the publishing industry.

But, just for a second think about what you are saying. If one could not record a person without their prior agreement, why do we have so many security cameras around the country? Why have so many of those cameras got mikes attached? How do security firms in stores operate, if you are not allowed to record somebody without their knowledge?

Again, I see no intention nor drive to blackmail this guy, what this girl wants is to be left alone and to get on with her life. While there is no specific legislation against bullying, there have been a number of cases taken under the Industrial Relations Acts, (1946-2001), and in a number of cases recorded information (without the prior knowledge of the perpetrator) has been used.

Again my advice would be, record this guy making his advances. Let him know that you have recorded this. Get on with your job. If your job/circumstances of employment change, go see a solicitor.

It is a long time since I read such a load of off-topic irrelevant gibberish but you actually have the occasional grain of truth in there amid all the contradictions and know-all-manship. Unfortunately for you it is the grains of truth that expose the rest of what you say.

The main truth is as you wrote (like I needed to be told this?:rolleyes:) - "Blackmail is illegal, under Irish Statute CJA Sections 71, 72, 73 (2006) can be taken into consideration." - bottom line indeed!

But look at this for absolute irrelevant balderdash - "it is perfectly legal (within this jurisdiction) to record those people whose behavior you believe would lead them to commit a crime, or to whom you believe are about to commit a crime."

So what? What is the relevance of this? Nobody said he was going to commit a crime? No poster said they thought his actions would lead him to commit a crime. So why are you citing this legal point, other than to contradict for the sake of contradiction? It is completely irrelevant. And you could spare us this specious "in this jurisdiction" nonsense; it's hardly Iranian law we are talking about - the context is clear.

Furthermore, look at this drivel you wrote - "But, just for a second think about what you are saying. If one could not record a person without their prior agreement, why do we have so many security cameras around the country? Why have so many of those cameras got mikes attached? How do security firms in stores operate, if you are not allowed to record somebody without their knowledge?"

Show me where I said it was illegal to record a person without their prior agreement? It was using such a recording for nefarious purposes i.e. blackmail, that I was talking about; and this was clearly implied. So clearly - if perhaps unwittingly- implied, that the poster who suggested it subsequently withdrew the remark in acknowledgement of this. It may not have been clear to you but I pitch my posts at the more general viewer who I believe can spot the nuances in the argument.

You might indeed "see no intention nor drive to blackmail this guy" but the actual poster to whom I replied accepted that such an interpretation could reasonably be taken from the comments. You are not judge and jury on that point.

Now I would appreciate if you would drop the Perry Mason act and let people discuss the actual topic if they wish.

Hobart

Sir Humphrey wrote: »

It is a long time since I read such a load of off-topic irrelevant gibberish but you actually have the occasional grain of truth in there amid all the contradictions and know-all-manship. Unfortunately for you it is the grains of truth that expose the rest of what you say.

The main truth is as you wrote (like I needed to be told this?:rolleyes:) - "Blackmail is illegal, under Irish Statute CJA Sections 71, 72, 73 (2006) can be taken into consideration." - bottom line indeed!

But look at this for absolute irrelevant balderdash - "it is perfectly legal (within this jurisdiction) to record those people whose behavior you believe would lead them to commit a crime, or to whom you believe are about to commit a crime."

So what? What is the relevance of this? Nobody said he was going to commit a crime? No poster said they thought his actions would lead him to commit a crime. So why are you citing this legal point, other than to contradict for the sake of contradiction? It is completely irrelevant. And you could spare us this specious "in this jurisdiction" nonsense; it's hardly Iranian law we are talking about - the context is clear.

Furthermore, look at this drivel you wrote - "But, just for a second think about what you are saying. If one could not record a person without their prior agreement, why do we have so many security cameras around the country? Why have so many of those cameras got mikes attached? How do security firms in stores operate, if you are not allowed to record somebody without their knowledge?"

Show me where I said it was illegal to record a person without their prior agreement? It was using such a recording for nefarious purposes i.e. blackmail, that I was talking about; and this was clearly implied. So clearly - if perhaps unwittingly- implied, that the poster who suggested it subsequently withdrew the remark in acknowledgement of this. It may not have been clear to you but I pitch my posts at the more general viewer who I believe can spot the nuances in the argument.

You might indeed "see no intention nor drive to blackmail this guy" but the actual poster to whom I replied accepted that such an interpretation could reasonably be taken from the comments. You are not judge and jury on that point.

Now I would appreciate if you would drop the Perry Mason act and let people discuss the actual topic if they wish.

There is a forum for this topic, if you want to avail of it.

The reason I talk about "jurisdiction", is to pre-empt the google addicts out there.

If you think I get my kicks from one-up-manship on an anonymous forum, your'e sadly mistaken.

As for the rest of your piffle, you said nothing of the sort. Your references (twice on this thread) to TV and it's characters, hints at where you are getting your erroneous ideas from.

Like I said, my advice stands, show me the case law and statute to disprove it, there is nothing wrong with recording a person in this instance, I actually tried to connect the the dots for you, but there seems to be a bit much timber in that forest of yours.

I've said my bit on this particular point, I won't be taking this particular issue up on this thread again with you.

Hobart

Aloysius Flyte wrote: »

No talk about blackmail, or anything like that, but I'd be bloody careful. He's at the top of his game and there is a recession out there and could make life difficult for you.

At last, somebody who actually gets my point.

Sir Humphrey

Hobart wrote: »

1) As for the rest of your piffle, you said nothing of the sort. Your references (twice on this thread) to TV and it's characters, hints at where you are getting your erroneous ideas from.

2) Like I said, my advice stands, show me the case law and statute to disprove it, there is nothing wrong with recording a person in this instance, I actually tried to connect the the dots for you, but there seems to be a bit much timber in that forest of yours.

3) I've said my bit on this particular point, I won't be taking this particular issue up on this thread again with you.

1) Show me where I said that anyone should take ideas from TV shows? Your reference to TV shows is complete bullsh*t designed to undermine me and deflect from the fact that you are getting your ears boxed. Now show me where I recommended TV shows for advice? I suggest that I actually said the opposite but perhaps you will set the record straight.

2) I have asked this already and you ignored it so I will keep asking as long as you keep asserting it - show me where I said that recording someone per se was illegal? Are you deliberately being obtuse as you simply cannot admit you got the wrong end of the stick.

It is blackmail that is wrong and in this instance, as the person who suggested it acknowledged, that is the very clear inference to be drawn from the suggestion. She's hardly told to record him because she likes his voice. You are taking hair-splitting to a new level in arguing this.

3) Why don't you grow a pair and defend what you are writing since you are the one who insisted on making an issue of a complete non-issue? But it would be good if you went back and read through the posts again because the stuff that is not in-your-face obvious and expressly stated seems to have gone over your head.

Though it is funny to see you agreeing with 'Aloysius Flyte' who apparently "gets your point" (though the person neither mentions you nor replies to you) while conveniently ignoring the fact that 'SpookyDoll' (who made the original suggestion) retracted the remark in a clear statement that the implication was blackmail and not some desire to merely become familiar with recording devices, as you quite ludricrously seem to believe.

Beruthiel

Sir Humphrey and Hobart, that's enough discussion on blackmail thanks. The point is made.
B

junior_apollo

Ok - Forget blackmail... forget recording and all that nonsense...

If he comes onto you... just let him know that your not interested... plain and simple, "sorry but no" as someone said in an above post - use the excuse of a boyfriend/partner as that will also draw a line that he shouldnt cross...

Getting your point across that you wont engage is simple and can be a lot easier than is being made out.. you dont need to destroy him at the party (no need to make a show (although you very well could and arguably he would deserve it, the rat)) but keep it plain and simple...

"Im flattered but your married and I am not interested thank you"
"Im sorry but no, we work together, your married and im involved with someone else, so im not interested"

If your feeling particularly uncomfortable and want to leave then use the excuse that your going to meet your boyfriend/partner, best case scenario would be to have boyfriend/partner appear.. but if its a private party then thats not an option...

Hope you can sift through the above posts for advice and hope it all works out ok for you OP

4Xcut

Didn't read every reply so I'm not sure if this has been suggested already:

It's one party, other than this there probably should be no issue as he's sober enough in work not to do anything. Would you consider just not going to the party, it's only one night out after all.

Before anyone says it, I know this is not her fault and why should she be the one not to go and I agree with this. However, this is an unfortunate position here, as the OP exmplains, with him having a clear credibility advantage due to public perception and a clear power advantage due to career status of both of you. It may be a case that he realises this and that's why he doesn't mind trying it on at a night out.

You could give an excuse that an old friend is in town and not have to worry about this.

junior_apollo

4Xcut wrote: »

Didn't read every reply so I'm not sure if this has been suggested already:

It's one party, other than this there probably should be no issue as he's sober enough in work not to do anything. Would you consider just not going to the party, it's only one night out after all.

Before anyone says it, I know this is not her fault and why should she be the one not to go and I agree with this. However, this is an unfortunate position here, as the OP exmplains, with him having a clear credibility advantage due to public perception and a clear power advantage due to career status of both of you. It may be a case that he realises this and that's why he doesn't mind trying it on at a night out.

You could give an excuse that an old friend is in town and not have to worry about this.

Although I do agree with most of this I do feel that avoiding the situation is only prolonging the problem.. Unless it is put to bed (pardon the pun) then it will continue to be a problem in the future.. and im sure the OP doesnt want to have to avoid every possible situation where an encounter may occur...

Im not trying to force my opinion on anyone but i do believe keeping it simple and getting your complete point across as per above would be the way to go.. I've had to do it before to a very good friend (married) who was interested in taking it further (different scenario I know but similar concept) at the risk of ruining the friendship.. but once it was explained that it couldnt go anywhere that was that... never had any dealings with the other party as that was not my place to intervene... but my point was made and the subject never arose again...

Hobart

junior_apollo wrote: »

Ok - Forget blackmail... forget recording and all that nonsense...

If he comes onto you... just let him know that your not interested... plain and simple, "sorry but no" as someone said in an above post - use the excuse of a boyfriend/partner as that will also draw a line that he shouldnt cross...

Getting your point across that you wont engage is simple and can be a lot easier than is being made out.. you dont need to destroy him at the party (no need to make a show (although you very well could and arguably he would deserve it, the rat)) but keep it plain and simple...

"Im flattered but your married and I am not interested thank you"
"Im sorry but no, we work together, your married and im involved with someone else, so im not interested"

If your feeling particularly uncomfortable and want to leave then use the excuse that your going to meet your boyfriend/partner, best case scenario would be to have boyfriend/partner appear.. but if its a private party then thats not an option...

Hope you can sift through the above posts for advice and hope it all works out ok for you OP

"I'm flattered?", "I'm sorry?" I would strongly advise against using the above terms. A simple "no" or "go away" should suffice, not that you should have to put up with the leeches unwanted attentions. Saying "I'm flattered" would definately give off all the wrong signals imo.

LegacyUser

Just say "It makes me feel very uncomfortable when you say this kind of thing, and I'd prefer if you didn't."

junior_apollo

Hobart wrote: »

"I'm flattered?", "I'm sorry?" I would strongly advise against using the above terms. A simple "no" or "go away" should suffice, not that you should have to put up with the leeches unwanted attentions. Saying "I'm flattered" would definately give off all the wrong signals imo.

Im not sure what your reasoning on trying to argue with other posters in this thread may be but nevertheless Ill explain my reasoning behind my post...

By using terms like those above the guy wont be as offended /bitter, as the OP is worried already about possible repercussions of her rejection of this guy.

She doesnt actually have any meaning behind any of it but it is a lot better way to handle it than... "F OFF"... or any other even semi-confrontational approach... By letting him down rather than demolishing his ego you let him walk away rejected and yet he wont be angry towards you..

Yes it may let him think.. oh she's submissive to me... but as the OP said.. she down the pecking order, he's a high flyer and massaging his ego that little bit while you make your escape is a much better option imo than kicking him in the ankles and running for it (so to speak)