• RichieAdler 🇦🇷@lemmy.myserv.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Everything other than a “hell yes” is a no.

    This must be said more frequently. This is the correct attitude. You may be alone longer, but you haven’t terrorized anybody. It’s a net win.

    • daellat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I feel like signals of interest are being conflated with Consent/approval of a date here

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        No, it’s not. If I’m talking to someone and they look disinterested, that’s not a “hell yes.” If they’re standing there while their four-top is waiting on refills, that’s not a “hell yes.”

        A “hell yes” is them asking me questions, or sharing a relatable story. It’s them smiling and looking at me when I talk. A “hell yes” is me asking “would you like to talk alone” and her saying “hell yes.”

        Get used to being alone. Learn to love its freedom and spontaneity, and then find someone who’s better than that who says “hell yes.”

        • daellat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Well I’m just saying I’ve had not hell yes signals turned into a hell yes date very quickly when I asked them out. Of course I always ask them very open ended so they have all the chance to say no but I got a “yes of course!”

          Sometimes people are just a bit shy or afraid, I know I probably give of pretty meh signals even if I’m crushing hard.

          I agree it’s very important not to fool yourself but sometimes you gotta ask to know for sure and I don’t think it’s that black and white all the time

          E: love a good Convo down vote no reply… weak sauce.

                • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I understand risk and security, sure. I carry a weapon everywhere I go because I understand it intimately.

                  I just object to the idea a person is “being terrorized” by that situation. As if all the people interacting with them are terrorists, because they are too confused about their relationship to their own fear and safety to carry a weapon.

                  I got terrorized by one person once, and now I keep that weapon on me at every moment I’m not behind my own locked doors. I do not believe that I am being terrorized, simply because I live in a dangerous environment.

                  Words have meaning, and the meaning matters. A person who is anxious is not, thereby, being “terrorized”.

                  “Schrodinger’s rapist” indeed, as if the concept of a dangerous environment didn’t exist before the year 2010 when that term got coined by people who think they’re the first to encounter the world.

                  • RichieAdler 🇦🇷@lemmy.myserv.one
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    coined by people who think they’re the first to encounter the world

                    Yet another US asshole who feels like John Wayne with his fucking gun and lacks the minimal empathy to be considered a decent human being.

                    Get bent.