Hey there fellas,

I find myself in need to opinions on a matter involving an attempt to ask out a woman today. First some background. I'm a US college student studying abroad in the UK. Recently in my Latin class (classics is the degree of choice) I met a lovely Dutch girl. Anyways, onwards and forwards. Now, today after class several of us went together for a drink at a nearby pub. several hours later when leaving it was just her and I left, and we had a short conversation in front of the pub, and, as we parted, I rather awkwardly asked her if she was busy over the weekend (I know, it wasn't terribly direct). She said she was busy with field hockey all weekend, so I asked about next week to which she replied that she couldn't say, because she basically lives day to day since she's incredibly busy and only has a brief window of opportunity to do homework (being too lazy to do it in the morning and too tired after eleven at night). But she added as a sort of caveat that we'll probably see each other at other Latin get togethers. Then we parted ways. My question is, do you guys think it was a particularly skilled turn down? Or am I reading too much in to what was simply an honest statement about being unable to make plans very far ahead in the future? If you haven't already guessed, I don't do very well with the subtleties of social interaction.

Views: 387

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

She gave you as solid of an answer as you gave her a solid question

+1

Exactly what I was going to say. +1

You always sum it up the best +1

Ah it is good you didn't ask "Will you have time to meet me at saturday at 11 am in the blablbla pub". Just try it a little bit more concrete the next time. Of course you two should have had some interactions that she seemed to enjoy. If you just were there too, she won't have a big reason to meet you. But you can try it anyways. Good luck.

You didn't get turned down, because you didn't ask her for anything.  You asked her an abstract question:  "Are you busy?"  She answered.

She may have understood what you were thinking, but it's not her responsibility to ask herself out for you!  You have to do it!  I suggest asking her to something specific, either with a time you imagine to be convenient ("Friday after class") or with some flexibility, but still specific enough ("Friday afternoon").  

Then, if she's savvy, she'll say,

"I can't."  This means:  no.

"I can't at that time" or "I can't, but at some other time..."  This means:  I really can't, but I like the idea.

No guarantee that she knows how to say it so clearly.  But it's the best guess for the start.

Yes.

Basically she informed you in a round-about-way that you need to be a bit more direct in your approach.  Something like "Do you want to catch a movie with me this Saturday night?" or "Would you like to join me for dinner this Sunday evening?".  No real need to put an exact time on it but a certain date and activity and an approximate time.

I had a conversation like that with my now-husband at the conclusion of our first date, but eventually we moved to talking in terms of actual dates and times. 

When I was in university, I couldn't get anyone to make plans more hours in advance than they were years old, but for dates you should make the attempt.  If she says she can't know a week or 2 ahead of time (work and sports and such CAN be like that), say you'll call her on Wednesday about her weekend schedule.  If she turns you down on Wednesday without suggesting another time, or at least, "But maybe next weekend..." consider that your final answer.

She answered the question you asked.  You didn't get turned down ... because you didn't invite her anywhere.  You were having a conversation about her weekend plans, not about whether she'd like to date you.

There are several problems with half-assed questions like that ... she doesn't know what you're asking, you don't know what question she's answering, and you prove to her you haven't the stones to ask her out directly (which ain't attractive).

Direct questions beget direct answers.  Doubt is worse than "no".  Ask her out next time.

JB

Suppose Adam Levine had asked her the very same questions.  What do you suppose her reaction would have been?

Mine would have been "Who's Adam Levine"? :o

Mine would be "Who cares".

RSS

Latest Activity

Jack Bauer replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"'Degenerates' was a generalization.  There are exceptions among those who seek abortions.  Probably no exceptions in the industry, though.  How anybody who makes a living caving in babies skulls and sucking them out of wombs…"
6 minutes ago
Jack Bauer replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"Don't confuse legal/illegal with right/wrong.  Exposing genuine barbarity is worth the expense of violating a bullshit unauthorized recording law. They ought to be given a medal. JB"
20 minutes ago
Seitanist Dan replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"The best thing to do overall is simply discern how much of this GOTCHA is simply drummed up for their crusade, which at the least points towards 'doctored for their own side'. GOTCHA tactics are never going to go away, it's how…"
24 minutes ago
Zachary Stucki replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"It is only illegal to record parties without their knowledge in some states, not all. And let's look at parity, there are liberal "Gotcha" journalists who do this sort of thing all the time. Are we calling for their prosecution? No.…"
49 minutes ago
Milo Morris replied to Paul MacAlindin's discussion Privilege is invisible to those who have it
"^^THIS!! And this does relate to privilege, white or otherwise. If those who claim to lack privilege would do what you just did in your post, they would be much better off. Why people can't or won't look at the positives in their lives,…"
59 minutes ago
Seitanist Dan replied to Paul MacAlindin's discussion "I like guns" in the group The Great Debate
"See? We still agree on thingies. "
1 hour ago
Sir replied to Paul MacAlindin's discussion "I like guns" in the group The Great Debate
""Few wish to restrict guns solely to cops or the military or make the nation a gun free zone. I have no qualms of having guns for home defense or even fun, and I doubt anyone here would, either." Yes, that's my point. Aussie style gun…"
1 hour ago
Seitanist Dan replied to Paul MacAlindin's discussion "I like guns" in the group The Great Debate
"Which is why I said might. For Williams, it would had taken a good interview by a damn good - or just suspicious - interviewer with a damn masters in psychology to deny him the pistol. But from what I hear of everyone who knew him, and without…"
1 hour ago

© 2015   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service