Being approached in the pub when you don't want to be

listermint · 31-07-2013 02:54PM

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Several posters have made it very clear that this applies to a small minority of men.

I was responding (as you know ) to the post at hand, and to the thankers of that post.

Of which you were one. Which would indicate some sort of agreement with the sentiment of the post....

kylith · 31-07-2013 03:01PM

Shane732 wrote: »

I totally accept that some men can be very persistent and it's annoying. However, if the woman isn't interested then why not just tell the guy straightaway as opposed to being seen to be polite (which IMO you're actually not being) for 5 mins and then telling them to f*uck off.

Because then you get this:

tylercheribini wrote:

In Hogans on Georges St a few years(either Friday or Saturday night, cant remember) I attempted to make conversation with two ladies and no sooner had I opened my mouth when one of them shoved her ring finger into my forehead whilst proudly exclaming "I'm married". Also asked a woman what time it was in my hometown years back to be immediately told "I have a boyfriend." This was actually a genuine request for time as my phone battery had died and had booked a taxi earlier on to collect me haha.

... the 'Jesus I was only asking the time!' reaction. Women don't tell men to back off straight away because maybe he is only asking the time, or maybe he does just want to take a chair.

We really can't win. If we tell a man we're not interested as soon as we're approached we're full of ourselves because we assume men only approach us to hit on us. If we give them the benefit of the doubt and are polite but reserved until he's clearly not getting the message we're rude timewasting bitches.

iwantmydinner · 31-07-2013 03:05PM

listermint wrote: »

I was responding (as you know ) to the post at hand, and to the thankers of that post.

Of which you were one. Which would indicate some sort of agreement with the sentiment of the post....

Just to be sure, I've re-read the post in question, and I fail to see the generalisation. Can you point to where the poster referred to all men?

B0jangles · 31-07-2013 03:05PM

kylith wrote: »

Because then you get this:

... the 'Jesus I was only asking the time!' reaction. Women don't tell men to back off straight away because maybe he is only asking the time, or maybe he does just want to take a chair.

We really can't win. If we tell a man we're not interested as soon as we're approached we're full of ourselves because we assume men only approach us to hit on us. If we give them the benefit of the doubt and are polite but reserved until he's clearly not getting the message we're rude timewasting bitches.

Bingo.

iwantmydinner · 31-07-2013 03:06PM

kylith wrote: »

Because then you get this:

... the 'Jesus I was only asking the time!' reaction. Women don't tell men to back off straight away because maybe he is only asking the time, or maybe he does just want to take a chair.

We really can't win. If we tell a man we're not interested as soon as we're approached we're full of ourselves because we assume men only approach us to hit on us. If we give them the benefit of the doubt and are polite but reserved until he's clearly not getting the message we're rude timewasting bitches.

Nailed it.

vitani · 31-07-2013 03:11PM

Shane732 wrote: »

Well the OP's post says that they'll talk to other people when they are willing to. So are all men supposed to stand at one side of the room waiting for various women to decide that they are ready to grace the man with her presence for a few minutes. You say why would her interaction with strangers in public place NOT be on her terms? There are two strangers in that scenario. It would be a very difficult world if everyone went around thinking "well I'm only going to talk to other people on my terms". There is give and take in every scenario. In any event, the OP said they were happy for men to approach them as her friend is single, so your point is rather moot. Get a grip of yourself, woman.

Or, and here's a mad idea, the men could say something along the lines of 'I hope I'm not interrupting anything?' when they approach the women, with the genuine intention of leaving if they are. It's not about us ladies sitting on our thrones and having men at our beck and call. It's about courtesy and recognising that both parties to a conversation should want to be involved.

Equally, if a women approaches a man and he's busy talking to a friend, waiting for a girlfriend, watching a match or just doesn't want to talk to her, she should leave him alone.

Oh, and the bit in bold? Not ok.

OldNotWIse · 31-07-2013 03:15PM

vitani wrote: »

Or, and here's a mad idea, the men could say something along the lines of 'I hope I'm not interrupting anything?' when they approach the women, with the genuine intention of leaving if they are. It's not about us ladies sitting on our thrones and having men at our beck and call. It's about courtesy and recognising that both parties to a conversation should want to be involved.

Equally, if a women approaches a man and he's busy talking to a friend, waiting for a girlfriend, watching a match or just doesn't want to talk to her, she should leave him alone.

Oh, and the bit in bold? Not ok.

It's been my experience that even when they say, "I hope I'm not interrupting anything" - they dont care if they are, and if you tell them they are, they persist.

Shane732 · 31-07-2013 03:19PM

vitani wrote: »

Or, and here's a mad idea, the men could say something along the lines of 'I hope I'm not interrupting anything?' when they approach the women, with the genuine intention of leaving if they are. It's not about us ladies sitting on our thrones and having men at our beck and call. It's about courtesy and recognising that both parties to a conversation should want to be involved.

Equally, if a women approaches a man and he's busy talking to a friend, waiting for a girlfriend, watching a match or just doesn't want to talk to her, she should leave him alone.

Oh, and the bit in bold? Not ok.

The bit in bold - was it ok when the other poster used the very same words, with a difference of one word?

I was reusing the other posters words.

I didn't see you pulling the other poster up on it. Not ok.

iwantmydinner · 31-07-2013 03:21PM

vitani wrote: »

Oh, and the bit in bold? Not ok.

To be fair, and to save you from potential abuse, I said the same thing to him, in response to an awful amount of exaggeration in the post I was quoting!

Edit: too late... And I reckon Vitani didn't see my post, so calm down.

Tallwall · 31-07-2013 03:21PM

kylith wrote: »

Because then you get this:

... the 'Jesus I was only asking the time!' reaction. Women don't tell men to back off straight away because maybe he is only asking the time, or maybe he does just want to take a chair.

We really can't win. If we tell a man we're not interested as soon as we're approached we're full of ourselves because we assume men only approach us to hit on us. If we give them the benefit of the doubt and are polite but reserved until he's clearly not getting the message we're rude timewasting bitches.

If someone asks you the time either tell them or don't tell them. Don't wave a ring in their face, that's fairly moronic.

If the time enthusiast attempts to manoeuvre into some general conversation you can then tell him you aren't interested in chatting.

vitani · 31-07-2013 03:24PM

Shane732 wrote: »

The bit in bold - was it ok when the other poster used the very same words, with a difference of one word?

I was reusing the other posters words.

I didn't see you pulling the other poster up on it. Not ok.

iwantmydinner wrote: »

To be fair, and to save you from potential abuse, I said the same thing to him, in response to an awful amount of exaggeration in the post I was quoting!

Edit: too late...

I wouldn't mind but I edited my post to include that. *sigh*

Apologies. I didn't see iwantmydinner post that initially, so didn't realise it was a play on her post.

um7y1h83ge06nx · 31-07-2013 03:35PM

There should be an international recognized traffic light sticker system in place, sort of like those college traffic light balls!

kylith · 31-07-2013 03:38PM

Tallwall wrote: »

If someone asks you the time either tell them or don't tell them. Don't wave a ring in their face, that's fairly moronic.

I agree that it was rude, but you have no idea how many times she was approached that day, maybe she was exasperated and short tempered after dealing with men who were after more than the time, and she has no way of knowing that you're not another one.

If the time enthusiast attempts to manoeuvre into some general conversation you can then tell him you aren't interested in chatting.

In which case she would still be labelled a rude bitch. Like I said; it is very difficult for a woman to win in a situation like that; she's either a rude bitch for attempting to head off unwanted attention at the start, or a rude bitch for telling a guy to Eff Off after putting up with unwanted attention for who knows how long. If less men pestered women, more women would be willing to engage with you long enough to tell you the time.

Pepe LeFrits · 31-07-2013 03:39PM

Allison Steep Significant wrote: »

There should be an international recognized traffic light sticker system in place, sort of like those college traffic light balls!

I'm thinking some sort of mandatory collar system where if you come within 3 feet of a person who hasn't authorised you, you get an electric shock...

Dolbert · 31-07-2013 03:49PM

People do realise that being approached isn't the issue, don't they? We're talking about the guys who won't take no for an answer. No-one is saying that all men do this...

iwantmydinner · 31-07-2013 03:54PM

Dolbert wrote: »

People do realise that being approached isn't the issue, don't they? We're talking about the guys who won't take no for an answer. No-one is saying that all men do this...

There's quite a bit of selective blindness happening here. Followed by selective indignation.

OldNotWIse · 31-07-2013 03:55PM

kylith wrote: »

I agree that it was rude, but you have no idea how many times she was approached that day, maybe she was exasperated and short tempered after dealing with men who were after more than the time, and she has no way of knowing that you're not another one.

In which case she would still be labelled a rude bitch. Like I said; it is very difficult for a woman to win in a situation like that; she's either a rude bitch for attempting to head off unwanted attention at the start, or a rude bitch for telling a guy to Eff Off after putting up with unwanted attention for who knows how long. If less men pestered women, more women would be willing to engage with you long enough to tell you the time.

pic or gtfo

um7y1h83ge06nx · 31-07-2013 03:55PM

True, I was just taking the p*ss a little with my traffic light comment.

In reality whenever people interact together there will always be misunderstandings. Now I'm not condoning or supporting certain misunderstandings like obviously over persistent guys, I'm just saying that misunderstandings between people happen every day, everywhere.

It's the people (men and women) that take things to the extreme (plenty of examples throughout this thread) that spoil the fun of meeting and interacting with new people for the rest of us.

Pepe LeFrits · 31-07-2013 04:12PM

Dolbert wrote: »

People do realise that being approached isn't the issue, don't they? We're talking about the guys who won't take no for an answer. No-one is saying that all men do this...

I was joking. Well, half joking. Think it could be a popular novelty event actually.

iwantmydinner wrote: »

There's quite a bit of selective blindness happening here. Followed by selective indignation.

I'm not indignated in the slightest...

iwantmydinner · 31-07-2013 04:20PM

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

I'm not indignated in the slightest...

Legs.Eleven · 31-07-2013 04:43PM

It happens now and then (the ones that don't go away even when told I want to catch up with friends and not just lads approaching in a nice, normal way which I don't mind) and I usually get snotty with them and tell them to leave me alone. They get the message then. I don't really care how I'm perceived in that situation. They're the one with the problem. Fook them.

Gotham · 31-07-2013 04:45PM

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

I'm thinking some sort of mandatory collar system where if you come within 3 feet of a person who hasn't authorised you, you get an electric shock...

I dont see why straight people havent copped on to the merits of the Gay Hankey Code.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handkerchief_code

Faith · 31-07-2013 05:09PM

Shane732 wrote: »

Well the OP's post says that they'll talk to other people when they are willing to. So are all men supposed to stand at one side of the room waiting for various women to decide that they are ready to grace the man with her presence for a few minutes. You say why would her interaction with strangers in public place NOT be on her terms? There are two strangers in that scenario. It would be a very difficult world if everyone went around thinking "well I'm only going to talk to other people on my terms". There is give and take in every scenario. In any event, the OP said they were happy for men to approach them as her friend is single, so your point is rather moot. Get a grip of yourself, woman.

I genuinely think you're missing the point. No one person should force their company on another. If you invade someone's space and interrupt them, then it's absolutely up to them whether or not they want to continue the interaction. You even say yourself - "There is give and take in every scenario". Yes, there is. Person A has invaded the space of Person B and has interrupted a prior interaction. Person A doesn't want to leave and Person B doesn't want A there. My point is that, as the invader, Person A should leave when they're not welcome. That's the give and take. Person A started the interaction of their terms (by interrupting) and Person B finished it on theirs (by asking Person B to leave). Your post is very contradictory.

A public house, is just that. It's a social setting. People are going to talk to each other in a pub. The fact of the matter is that certain settings are more conducive to different forms of socialising. If I wanted to have a chat with a friend for a couple of hours I wouldn't go to a nightclub to have it. Would I be correct to start giving out about people dancing in a nightclub and interfering with my chat? A pub has been a place where men and women have approached each other since year dot. It's not going to change.

If you're in a nightclub having a chat, and a stranger comes between you and your friend and dances in your face, on purpose, so that you can not continue your conversation, and then they refuse to leave when you ask them to, then yes, you've every right to complain.

Daveysil15 · 31-07-2013 06:38PM

kylith wrote: »

The rude responses are most likely because you did not heed the 'not interested' signals until she felt that she had no other option but to be rude. Don't let it get to that stage, for goodness' sake; be aware of if you are annoying someone.

I don't usually let it get to that stage. I'd have a good idea if someone is not interested after a bit of conversation, but I still get the odd rude response straight away before a conversation even has a chance to develpe.

There aren't always 'signals' either. Sometimes I might approach a woman who is not directly looking at me or is chatting to a friend. Again, sometimes this works and sometimes it doesn't.

The point is it can be very difficult to establish eye contact or read signals in a crowded noisy setting. Some encounters can be completely random like bumping into someone on the way back form the toilets, or chatting to someone while waiting in the queue to get into a club.

Millicent · 31-07-2013 06:44PM

Gotham wrote: »

listermint wrote: »

Perhaps try the venue as an option it may turn out to be better? Point being go to certain bars, attract certain attention. Its the way of the world. Certain bars have certain clientele. if thats 'dicks' then avoid it .....

I agree with you, it's sad but probably the best thing to do. I have a related anecdote:

Years ago I went to see daft punk at Oxygen.
Half way through, the dance tent venue closed and the daft punk concert was inundated with rave heads who couldn't stick going cold turkey from a bit of electronic music.
The whole atmosphere changed to one I was very uncomfortable with and I had to leave, It's sad - I was looking forward to Daft punk so much, but I think my choice was for the better experience.

And what if it happened almost every time you went to a gig? Do you think it would be fair or reasonable to expect that you stop going to gigs you enjoyed because other people couldn't act in a decent manner?

who_me · 31-07-2013 06:56PM

As a guy, I'm kind of fascinated by this. Over the years, I've had a few friends or colleagues who (I'd have thought) must be incredibly annoying in this way. They'd approach a girl even if she's with a guy - who may or may not be her boyfriend/SO -, or even if she's obviously in mid-conversation with friends. In fairness, the guys would always be funny rather than overbearing and threatening but still they're very slow to take no for an answer.

What really gets me though is when they complain about someone being "a snobby $%*&" for not speaking to them. Why?!? Do they think every woman in the place is at their beck and call?

Nowadays, whenever I'm out with certain friends and they're about to approach a group of women, I just take a step away and let them to it. If anything, I've gone to the other extreme now where I'd almost never approach a stranger in a pub/club environment, as I'd be too worried about butting in/being invasive etc.

Malari · 31-07-2013 07:08PM

Look, MAYBE for every guy who is overly pushy you get a girl who is rude and aggressive when initially approached. And MAYBE for every girl who genuinely excuses herself because she wants to continue chatting with her friends there is a strange girl who likes to give out "unavailable" signals despite being desperate for attention. This is not what this thread's about.

Even if I'm with a friend I haven't seen in ages, or someone I'm just having a sensitive conversation with, I have never been outright dismissive to any guy who approaches in a civil manner. I would think most, if not all my contemporaries are the same. It doesn't take much to politely explain you are having a private conversation and hey - it's flattering to be the object of attention even if I'm in a relationship and not interested! I don't think anyone is calling for guys to stop approaching girls in general. FAO guys who push it way too much, just listen to what is being said and respect it.

Pug160 · 31-07-2013 07:55PM

Candie wrote: »

Drunken men pestering women are doing the same thing over and over again with the same result. Why should it be the victims that change their behaviour? Why is it expecting too much to be able to sit in your chosen venue and be left alone?

kylith wrote: »

BECAUSE WE LIKE PUBS. I like pubs; I like them for the relaxed atmosphere, the comfy seats, the large selection of beers, the fact that you can sit there for hours on end chatting, all things that you generally will not find in restaurants. I sometimes go for dinner with my friends, but you cannot stay in a restaurant for the night, they do not want you to and they are generally eager to get you on your way as soon as you have eaten. A restaurant is not a comfy, cosy place to have a natter, a pub is.

And why is the 'answer' that women should avoid places? Why isn't it that men should be more aware of body language? Or that men should have the good grace to not get stroppy if a woman says she's not interested? Why does it always seem that it's women who have to alter their behaviour?

Well you need to weigh up the pros and cons and decide whether or not it's worth the hassle. We don't live in a perfect world so we all need to compromise on certain issues - every single one of us. It is your right to walk home alone at 2 or 3am in the morning, but doing so is considered too dangerous for most people - some men included. So the majority of people, realising that we don't live in a perfect world, pay extra money for a taxi home. There is a huge difference between what we'd like and reality, and to suggest that only women are victims is very ignorant.

What is essentially being asked here is why something that has been going on for so long is still happening, even though the answers are obvious. No one is telling women to stop going to bars, some of us are suggesting that all you can do is compromise (which realistically is all you can do). ''Men'' are not doing anything, certain individuals are. Bars often have drunkards, socially inept people, sexually frustrated people and many other different types of people. The bars exist to make a profit and very little else. Some bars do try to clean up the clientele but the problem never truly goes away as stupid, drunken behaviour can potentially be committed by anyone.

What's being described here is generally not illegal - it's just irritating, and in some cases probably a bit unnerving. But there are no cures, just compromises.

Daveysil15 · 31-07-2013 07:56PM

Pug160 wrote: »

I sympathise with girls to a certain extent here but if you know there's a good chance that you'll be getting unwanted attention, then why do you keep choosing a bar as a venue? Or certain bars in particular? Bars are not the only places with a lively atmosphere, there are some nice restaurants with a relaxed setting where you could eat and have a drink while catching up. It's a compromise but that's life. We all have to make compromises from time to time. You actually have one thing in common with those drunken men: you're doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Weigh up your priorities.

Conversely you could ask why men continue to approach women when there's a good chance they'll get shot down. They won't always get shot down, just like women won't always get approached by aggresive men who won't take no for an answer.

There's still a lot of enjoyment to be had at these places, its just a small minority of people (both male and female) who are gobshytes - simple as. It's best not to let a fool ruin your night out.

iwantmydinner · 31-07-2013 08:03PM

Pug160 wrote: »

Well you need to weigh up the pros and cons and decide whether or not it's worth the hassle. We don't live in a perfect world so we all need to compromise on certain issues - every single one of us. It is your right to walk home alone at 2 or 3am in the morning, but doing so is considered too dangerous for most people - some men included. So the majority of people, realising that we don't live in a perfect world, pay extra money for a taxi home. There is a huge difference between what we'd like and reality, and to suggest that only women are victims is very ignorant.

What is essentially being asked here is why something that has been going on for so long is still happening, even though the answers are obvious. No one is telling women to stop going to bars, some of us are suggesting that all you can do is compromise (which realistically is all you can do). ''Men'' are not doing anything, certain individuals are. Bars often have drunkards, socially inept people, sexually frustrated people and many other different types of people. The bars exist to make a profit and very little else. Some bars do try to clean up the clientele but the problem never truly goes away as stupid, drunken behaviour can potentially be committed by anyone.

What's being described here is generally not illegal - it's just irritating, and in some cases probably a bit unnerving. But there are no cures, just compromises.

I'm not being ratty when I say this: we know all this.

This thread was started as a way of just discussing the experiences.

No one looked for a cure, no one said it was the responsibility of the bars to eliminate obnoxious behaviour, no one said it goes beyond a very small section of society.

We just wanted to talk to each other about it.

Being approached in the pub when you don't want to be

Comments