So are you single? Argos style....

Tell me how wrote: »

Your statement here contains a grey area with the use of the word 'probably'

Ha you are right. Im pretty certain he broke a law but I dont know enough about it. Certainly when I was taking customer details I was told it was law to protect the info but that may be a debit card thing more than phone numbers

breezy1985 wrote: »

I know many women would prefer a delivery man to a solicitor or architect.

Either way anyone who uses confidential info for personal reasons is wrong

Prefer them for what? To be calling to their home?

Esse85 wrote: »

Prefer them for what? To be calling to their home?

I was replying to your comment so tell me what you meant by being happy about a solicitor rather than a delivery man ?

Candie wrote: »

There are so many nuances that words on a screen or page can't account for. The guy did the wrong thing (whether he was a delivery guy, the Dalai Lama or a billionaire)

Guy delivers something and polite chat takes place, he misreads, follows it up with a text and it's not a huge deal other than him breaking the conditions of his employment and leaving himself open to justifiable censure. I can understand her being uncomfortable with someone knowing her address and wanting to know if she's alone in the house. It absolutely was creepy, not romantic or whimsical as some seem to see it.

Guy delivers something, stands there staring and breathing heavily and licking his lips, creeping woman out and following up with a text asking if she's single, breaking conditions of employment etc., and you better believe I'd be freaking out at some random creep knowing where I live and being interested to know if I was alone in my house. Sometimes you meet someone who just gets all your bells ringing. For all I know this guy is one of them.

You'd imagine most men would be smart enough to figure out it would at the very least make the woman uncomfortable. Either way, she is not the one at fault here.

He did not ask was she alone in the house though. Doing so would indeed have been straight creepy.

But, if it had been as simple as you stated here 'Guy delivers something and polite chat takes place, he misreads, follows it up with a text' which, for all we know, was how the guy experienced it, then calling that creepy would be, for me, to suggest that all unsolicited engagement of a romantic nature is creepy.

Where are people reading that the driver asked was she alone in the house?

And if he was in her house, I would guess he was invited in, because I haven't seen anywhere that he forced his way in.

If your that easily "disgusted, unsafe", again don't invite a person in just because they have an argos t-shirt on them.

"I do not feel safe knowing my data was accessed so easily" but you invite a guy into your home.

Candie wrote: »

Asking if she's single kind of gives the game away about whether or not there's another adult in the house or not. Most of the time, at any rate.

Unsolicited engagement in a bar, at a party, most social spaces is fine. Not when someone already knows your address and you simply have no clue whether or not they take rejection well. Most women have experienced at least one occasion of abuse when someone approaches them on a night out and they decline to engage. You can't take it for granted that someone will leave it at 'no thanks'. That experience would make you very wary of a situation where someone knows where you live, and you're put in a position where you're rejecting their interest.

Completely different scenario when you can walk out of a bar and never see them again to rejecting them and not knowing how they're taking it, and they know where you live.

I have to disagree there that the answer to such a question would imply the physical situation one is in at that moment. It is a term used on legal documents, relationship status 'single' with no ambiguity as to the context.

I don't dispute the experience which unfortunately many women people have had but also the reality that many relationships originated with someone taking a chance to get to know someone and I have never before heard the argument that it is not something which you should do if you happen to know where that person lives. My friend is married because he knocked on the door of a girl whose house he walked past on his way from work and had noticed her.
My father met my mother when he was a helper on a delivery truck and she was a shop assistant on his route.

Are we to assume that every man is going to be inherently viewed as a threat and that it is our obligation to ensure we do not reinforce that idea? That seems a scary thought.

My sisters are all married now, but, if 5 years ago they were telling me about how they had been propositioned, I think I would have rathered hearing about this scenario than a guy with dutch courage approaching one of them in a bar.

I will repeat my point also just in case there is any ambiguity, what he did was inappropriate and him losing his job is a reasonable outcome given that but that it was not necessarily creepy behaviour.

On another note do lads push their case after a no? My attitude was always ya blew yer chance.

Candie wrote: »

TMH, I have never said and nor have I implied that every man should be seen as a threat. Please don't infer that from what I have said about this particular instance. It is reasonable for women (and men) to be aware of risk from many situations, and again, I never implied that men should be seen as a threat by default and I think it's unfair to imply I meant that.

Your mum and dad didn't meet by your mum receiving an unsolicited text from someone who knows where she lives. Most people get to know one another first. Maybe the guy who knocked on the girls door got away with it because she lived with her family. She might have received it differently if she lived alone.

I'll have to disagree with you. It is creepy to use confidential information to contact someone unsolicited, and as I said before, MOST men would know that sending a text like that would likely put a woman on edge.

He didn't even ask to see her again. He asked if she was single. Most peoples relationship status is a big clue to their living arrangements.

I am not suggesting you inferred something, I asked the question because what I am reading on this thread is that approaching someone who has not consented to being approached is unacceptable.

I have been on this discussion since yesterday and am trying to understand how it was unquestionably creepy for this man to reach out to the lady in this way given that many relationships originated with someone having to approach a person who they did not know everything about or whether they were open to a relationship or not.

And I would go so far as to say that I have heard more and more conversations lately that the world of internet dating is becoming less and less appealing and people would like to 'meet someone in real life'. This thread would tell me that that is not an attractive idea either.

We cannot read too much in to what way the conversation in the text went as there wasn't really a conversation but more that both of them posted disjointed comments.

Tell me how wrote: »

I am not suggesting you inferred something, I asked the question because what I am reading on this thread is that approaching someone who has not consented to being approached is unacceptable.

I have been on this discussion since yesterday and am trying to understand how it was unquestionably creepy for this man to reach out to the lady in this way given that many relationships originated with someone having to approach a person who they did not know everything about or whether they were open to a relationship or not.

And I would go so far as to say that I have heard more and more conversations lately that the world of internet dating is becoming less and less appealing and people would like to 'meet someone in real life'. This thread would tell me that that is not an attractive idea either.

We cannot read too much in to what way the conversation in the text went as there wasn't really a conversation but more that both of them posted disjointed comments.

It's creepy because of the way he obtained her contact details. Asking her if she is single is not the issue. Using her contact details without her consent was the creepy part. She provided her details to Argos. He expoited that for his own means. She feels vulnerable because someone she doesn't know, who she didn't consent to contacting her in this context is doing so.

Candie wrote: »

She was at home, he knows where she lives. It's a total game changer to meeting someone socially, maybe chatting and smiling and reading each others signals. He delivered something to her house, and now she gets to worry about how he takes rejection. Sure, someone could follow you home from Sainsburys but that's not what we're talking about.

I would think there's plenty to be read into that text.

We're obviously not going to see the situation the same, but I think you're not taking on board how the fact that he knows where she lives and sent a text out of the blue using private information changes the whole dynamics of the situation.

It simply can't be compared with most social situations, and I really don't understand how people can't see that.

If she was that worried and scared, especially seen as the delivery guy is given her her address to do his job, she could easily of wrote back and said I'm actually happily married thanks or I'm in a long term relationship and my boyfriend will be home soon and I'd be 99% sure that would of been the end of it.

loalae wrote: »

But, like, why should she have to pretend to be attached (if she is in even single) just to feel safe in her own home. She did nothing wrong and shouldn't have been put in this position. I don't get why people are saying she should have done something differently.

It's called common sense.