sexual etiquette

My Reply for the Question "What's the Best Way to Turn Down a 2nd Date" For Em and Lo's Wise Guy Feature

Fri, 2010-08-27 14:58

Along the same lines as my previous post, here’s the answer I submitted a while back for this week’s Em & Lo’s Wise Guys feature. The question was “What’s the best way to turn down a guy who you’ve been on a date or two with, but don’t want to go on any others?” My answer?

The most gracious way is also maybe the most practical. You want to say some variation on “I wouldn’t have gone out with you the first time if I didn’t like you. I wouldn’t be saying no now [i.e. instead of just disappearing] if I didn’t respect you.” The point being to make it clear it you didn’t make a mistake saying yes the first time, and that not being a perfect match for you doesn’t make him a loser. That’s the gracious part.

The practical part is that men start learning as early as fairy tales that we have to be persistent, to never take no for an answer, to strive and achieve, and if we just work at it long and hard enough we’ll always “win over” the reluctant girl in the end. Letting him down with ego intact makes it less likely that he’ll try redoubling his effort to win you over. If he can walk away feeling respected he’ll be more likely to respect both you and your decision.

I said it here.

If only I’d figured that out years ago. That and understanding you should probably say the same thing to a woman you didn’t want to go on a 2nd or 3rd date with.

Sigh.

The other wise guys’ answers are pretty good too, as are the comments.

Refereeing Kevin Drum and Andrew Sullivan on the Propriety Prying Into the Sexual Orientation of Public Figures

Wed, 2010-05-19 11:37

Kevin Drum of Mother Jones challenges uuber blogger Andrew Sullivan’s justification for prying into Attorney General and Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan’s sexual orientation. He challenges Sullivan’s further assertion that it’s actually homophobic not to pry.

Andrew Sullivan explains why he thinks it’s OK to ask public figures if they’re gay:

If someone’s entire private life is on the table except that, it’s a function of homophobia. Period. A gay person is free to adopt such a homophobic veil; but a reporter need not enable it. So when does Benjy Sarlin write a piece on his own magazine’s “ethics”?

Look. I get why Andrew feels this way. And if that really were the only thing off the table, he’d have a point. But here’s a short sample of other questions that are generally off limits when you’re interviewing public figures:

  • So, have you ever had an affair?
  • Do you masturbate when your wife isn’t around?
  • Have you ever had a three-way?
  • Do you download a lot of porn from the internet? Or do you prefer buying it old school on the newsstand?
  • I think Asian guys are really hot. How about you?

Notice a trend? They’re all related to your sex life. And [unless the interviewee brings it up] they’re all generally off limits.

He said it here.

I think that’s about right. For better or worse (I agree slightly with Sullivan that it’s worse) sexual orientation is classified as a type of sex one can be interested in (i.e. part of a continuum that includes threeways, masturbation, and, say, oral sex) when instead sexual orientation more accurately categorizes who you’d want to do some or all of those activities (threeways, masturbation, oral sex, etc) with!

I’d disagree with Sullivan, though, that the confusion of categories is evidence of homophobia.

So even though I completely get his point, in defense of Sullivan I’m going to give Drum a very mild ding for not using even more bland but still quite off-limits questions such as “Do you use insertable weights when you do Kegels?” or “How long is your refractory period after ejaculation?”

With an Either-Or Choice Who Do You Think Should Choose?

Fri, 2009-02-20 16:36

For their regular “wise guys” feature this week Lo of Em & Lo: Sex. Love. And Everything in Between. asked three experts

“If guys had to choose between only intercourse or only blowjobs for the rest of their life, which do you think most guys would choose?”

Read the quote in context here.

It’s always easy to try and dodge either/or questions this way but her panel does a good job of sticking to the situation at hand. “Straight single guy Chris” thinks most men would pick fellatio but advises intercourse. “Married straight guy Fred” agrees. And “Gay Committed Guy Terence” intercourse for sure. Two commenters, David Perrins and Yatz say given a choice they’d pick cunnilingus. Which is outside the scope of the question but worth consideration because it brings up what I think the most important consideration would be: whichever activity one’s partner would prefer doing for the rest of her life.

Because, really, you want to have blowjobs for the rest of your life then what’s your partner going to get out of it? Or intercourse when it didn’t do much for her?

Turn it around for a minute and see what I mean: your partner gets to choose whether she’d rather have only intercourse or only cunnilingus, right? What if Perrin’s or Yatz’s partner picks intercourse? What if Chris’s or Terence’s partner picks oral? Either way their partners might be happy but Perrin, Yatz, Terence and Chris? Not as much.

And then (with the tables still turned) over time, how enthusiastic about persevering would Chris, Perrin, Terrence, or Yatz be? And how much fun, exactly, is an unenthusiastic partner? So. Turn the tables back to the original question and see if you’d come up with the same answer?

[Still very poor net connection. Things should be back to normal when I get home later this weekend. —fl]

Channelling Miss Manners on closeted Republican cruisers in public restrooms

Tue, 2007-08-28 11:13

Ok, so news reports to the contrary, not every male member of the Republican Senatorial and Congressional caucus is covertly homosexual. But as Susie Bright says sometimes it seems that way. I’ll have a bit more to say about the consequences of closeted people attempting to regulate other people’s sexual behavior in a later post but for now I’ve got a little advice for other straight men.

Back in 1982 Judith Martin published Miss Manners’ Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior, Freshly Updated, mainly a collection of her syndicated column that dated back to around 1979. Martin was the real deal back then, the legitimate successor to ettiquette experts Amy Vanderbilt and Emily Post.

So it was a big deal when she was asked

DEAR MISS MANNERS:
What am I supposed to say when I am introduced to a homosexual “couple?”

And Martin replied

GENTLE READER:
“How do you do?” “How do you do?”

When you unpack that completely revolutionarily brief, not to mention revolutionary-for-a-mainstream-columnist, advice it expands into “homosexuals are people deserving no more or less courtesy than any other people.” Pretty brilliant as far as I was concerned.

As far as I know, though, she never addressed another issue that I and literally countless other straight men have felt a little awkward about: fielding a proposition from a gay man. So without further ado here’s how I think she would have answered:

DEAR MISS MANNERS:
If I’m not interested what am I supposed to say when I am propositioned by a homosexual?

GENTLE READER:
“No thank you.”

I’ve got to say that over the last 35 years or so that’s worked every time.

I say this not least because I think the police in progressive cities like Minneapolis, let alone in more, um, “sheltered” cities like Titusville, Florida feel obliged to setup anti-cruising sting operations in public men’s restrooms is that most straight men, fueled perhaps by our own sense of heterosexual entitlement towards women, don’t realize that in the gay community not only does “no mean no,” no also means “no hard feelings.” And since there’s none of that frustrated/outraged sense of outrage between gay men the way there seems to be between straight men and women, all you really have to say when proposition, really, really, is “no thank you.”

User login