"Just Looking for Causal Sex"  

Posted by Plain Jane in , , ,

The problem with having a conversation is that both people must be involved if it is to go anywhere. My problem this weekend is that every guy I am chatting with lets me lead the conversation, That is not really the problem though, I am pretty used to that - the problem is they answer my question, but don't ask anything back. So I respond to their answer, learn something about them, and hit my head against the wall. It is hard to have a genuine conversation that way, or feel like they are interested in learning about me at all. I would chalk it up to being "a guy thing" except there are men who are able to have a reciprocal conversations and have done so with me. I don't know. I consider it a lack of interest. Perhaps that's not true, but I feel like there is probably enough truth in it to say adios to those who cannot seem to have a normal conversation. It really isn't rocket science and to be honest, I am sick of trying so hard to do something that should really be simple.

And one more thing. It seems to me that most guys assume that ALL girls get multitudes of messages every day in their inbox. I read a guy's profile  who said that he doesn't message any woman because he knows they get so many messages every day. He said if a woman is interested she should message him because he isn't going to do it (even if he is interested) and she'll know he is interested if he replies. He said he won't even do those winks, which is a simple click of a button. I find this profoundly annoying. Because it is not true and does not happen for all women. And some would be happy to get a message once in awhile. This was true of me for many years. Heck, it's still true, even though I do get more messages than I have in the past. If you are interested in someone, you have to take a chance. You can't be worried about being just another fish in the pond. And if that is your worry, then you have to work at standing out (preferably in a genuine, non-creepy way). I think saying you have to message me is a cop out for not having to try or put yourself out there. I think it also means he doesn't take rejection well.

But to the more important material...


I did get the OLD version of a booty call this weekend. Saturday night, after 11:30pm, this guy I've barely talked to (because he can't hold up his end of the conversation, surprise, surprise) text me and asked if I wanted to come over for drinks and to 'watch a movie.' And when I said no (citing bad roads, cause it was snowing), he asked if I wanted him to come over there. Really? Do men even have to think about safety? There is no way I am meeting a man for the first time at his home, or inviting him into my own. I think that's OLD safety rule #1. Do men not have to play by the same rules? And do I overlook the obvious boot call that this was?

My blog would not be complete if I did not put up my favorite profile of the week. This guy wrote me this message:

First off, I do not live in Vancouver, I live in Boulder and I only keep my profile isolated for boring professional reasons. With that being said, you are obviously quite fun in ways which I happen to like very much, and I think that you and I have a considerable amounts to discuss. You seem like you give very few fucks while living responsibly-enough for your preferences [really? very few fucks?]; I live similarly, and see that trait in those who have it. You also seem to lack my apathy, which is a good for you because it gets in the way of life at times, admittedly [um....thank you?]. If I have your attention so far, I would love to get it more [done and done, because how can I walk away now?]. Incidentally, I also posted a Craigslist post which you may or may not have seen [um, we are on okcupid, not craigslist. Why would I look there?].  [he gives the link]. ...and I would love to hear your thoughts on it. [Oh, I seriously doubt that]. 

So, before I go to his Craigslist profile, I check out his okcupid profile. It's a gem, it really is. My favorite part:

And I do not particularly care what you feel about how you look, or how you feel about what I look like. Personality, demeanour, characteristics and non-work interests are what I like most in others. Just leave if your idea of a compelling message is "ur hot" etc [on one hand I get it, on the other hand...find a better way to say it]. And my favorite line comes at the end under the You Should Message Me If.... section.... Write me with substance or do not write me at all.

It says he replies frequently, so there must be a lot of girls out there writing him with substance. Or something. I don't even really know what that means. Especially given this next part. Now, let's talk about his Craigslist profile because Oh. My. God. Admittedly, I did not look at it until about 5 minutes ago. His message and profile were enough to keep me away (but after reading his message again for this post, curiosity got the better of me). Had I seen it then, I would have posted this when I first got the message last week. That's how awesomingly disturbing this is. Perfect blog material.

"As per the title [Wanting A BBW to objectify :) - m4w - 29], I am looking for a BBW to objectify. There would be much face-fucking and come everywhere, although far more could/should happen beyond just that--unless that is solely what you want.  Our "relationship" of sorts would be casual at most, although I am by no means averse to regularly meeting. I am 29, tall, in good shape, with tattoos, drug - and disease free; as for you, age is negotiable, and I want you to be curvy, very open-minded, and also drug-disease-free. Generally submissive and fetish-friendly preferred, but this is not entirely required. If you are this kind of woman and this sounds like your kind of fun, write me. My photo for yours. This is preferred to be a longer-term relationship of sorts, and not just a one-time meeting. Finally, I take "BBW" to mean enjoyable curvy, and is not meant as an insult to those with a body type I happen to appreciate."

And he actually wanted my thoughts on this. Oh, he just has no idea what he is asking. I have read and re-read my profile to see if I, in any kind of way, suggest that I would be a person who would go for this sort of thing. The idea that I would willingly allow anyone to objectify me is laughable. It's actually audibly laughable. The fact that he considers me fun in "ways in which I happen to like very much" makes me a little worried about what my profile is saying, given what he considers "fun." And I am not quite sure how he thinks we have anything to discuss. My profile, which is short and sweet, does CLEARLY state, "Please don't message me if you are in an open-relationship, are just looking for casual sex, or do not live in the state of Colorado." So given that his CL ad is basically an ad for causal sex, I just don't see how that says to him in any way, "Please, message me." Cause that seems like a good idea. I get that there are people out there who just want casual sex (with or without the submission/fetishes). I respect it. Everyone has their thing. But I think that if you are going to steer someone in the direction of your ad (instead of them wandering to it because that's what they are looking for), you should probably have a good idea about whether or not they share such interests. Which I clearly don't. And by "clearly" I mean it is insanely obvious by the profile I wrote specifically detailing that.

Just when I was sure OLD couldn't get any weirder. Or more disturbing.

PJ


This entry was posted on Monday, May 11, 2015 at Monday, May 11, 2015 and is filed under , , , . You can follow any responses to this entry through the comments feed .

0 comments

Post a Comment

<< Newer Post
Older Post >>