I'll handle this one.
We all know that females simultaneously demand equal treatment and the privilege of being female. Ignoring the fact that this is idiotic and contradictory, it's still something that must be dealt with by us men on the daily.
First of all, do you want to have sex with this girl? Of course you do, she's hot, and she's a girl. What are you going to do instead, have an intelligent conversation with her? That's noble, but let's not be facetious.
Onto your question. Your honest reply was given in that conversation at that time, so the truth was already communicated. No need to try and "fix" it. In the meantime, you aren't pursuing her for sex, which is understandable. Women are the ones obsessed with sex, not men.
If you bring it up again, trying to backpedal what happened, you'll look like you're lying - whether you are or not - and she'll know you've been worrying about it. If she asks about it, exercise some class and tell her straight up that you would of course deliver the dick to her if she wanted it (and she wants it, trust me), but that you aren't worried about it and enjoy being with her anyways. If she doesn't believe you at that point, then it's her problem.
Also, worry not about how she takes your words. If she thinks "oh I'm unattractive" then it's just further confirmation that she wants it. And she does.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Dear Fabian,
we were out with friends yesterday, when somehow in the middle of a non-serious conversation that involved badmouthing men we ended up stating that men would only be nice to women when they want sex. So this one girl turns to one of my friends and me and asks: "Hey, wait, is that the reason you two are being nice to me?"
Well, being in a fun and badmouthing mood, we totally screwed up the answer.
She tried not to let on, but I know she didn't like the answer at all, she rarely laughed the rest of the evening.
To be honest, she is hot, but having her just as a friend has so far been more rewarding than my entire last relationship, and currently I don't see any reason for further advancements (which would fail anyway). Sex is definetly not my goal, nor something that passes my mind when seeing her.
Now, how do I best explain that to her without sounding like a total bootlicker that's just saying nice things to get her into bed? And without saying something she'll understand as being called unattractive? Is there even a believable way for a guy to say "I consider you attractive, yet I don't want sex with you"?
Should I just let it go and try to avoid that topic in the future?
greetings,
a guy that hopes that neither his friends nor his ex-girlfriend read the tasvideos forums.
Ouch yeah this wasn't handled very well. The good news though is you're probably overthinking this.
It's tough to give a general answer here too because a lot of it depends on what kind of person you and your female friend are. If you guys are easy going and know each other well and laugh together a lot about issues like these (sex etc) there's definitely no need to do anything about the situation, it'll blow over in a few days tops.
Are you a quiet kinda nerdy socially awkward guy? I'm guessing you probably are (not a criticism or anything at all), which means two things. One, that your "I want to have sex with you" comment really IS kinda creepy and you might want to say something about it, and two that you'll probably won't be able to pull off a good explanation and will seem even more creepy.
It's not a very big deal though, don't worry. Here's what you do. First, find out if this thing is still bothering her (if she's a fun extrovert, it won't. If she's a quiet shy prude, it might). You find this out by noticing if she's more quiet than usual and doesn't laugh or smile as much around you any more. If you're in a group setting and she's laughing at whatever, when you say something to her, does her smile kinda fade and she comes off a little standoffish? That kind of thing.
My guess is your troubles end right here because it won't bother her. If it does, however, you need to make her realize you're not in love with her or anything, that it's no big deal. You do this by making quick comments in passing about another chick's nice looking ass or hot boobies or whatever you want. Don't force this though, it needs to sound natural and you can't just randomly bring it up in conversation because it will seem weird if you don't always talk about this stuff together. So wait for an opportunity, hopefully you hang out in a group most of the time, you shouldn't be saying this directly to her or anything. That would probably be weird too.
Anyway to sum up. Probably no big deal, don't sweat it. If it appears to bother her, compliment other chicks when she's around, or talk about other chicks when she's around. I'm pretty sure she realizes, at least subconsciously, that being a hot chick means she'll have to deal with guys wanting to sex her. She's used to it and as long as she hears an indication she's not the only target of your sexual fantasies, it'll blow over.
I know you said you wanted to talk to her and tell her you don't feel like this at all, but I don't think it's a good idea even if it's true. By bringing it up, you're making it a bigger deal that it is and you'll just reintroduce more awkwardness to your friendship. The other problem with it is she probably won't believe you either, because she'll realize it makes no sense for you to overreact like this if you actually don't have a crush on her.
If needed, update with more/new details and I'll tell you how to proceed.
Dear Fabian,
Simon or Garfunkel?
John or Paul or George or Ringo?
Rocket Man or Lion King?
Speedrun or Superplay?
Do you miss the attention?
I'm sorry I don't have a juicy relationship problem for you. Have you considered becoming a syndicated columnist? Seriously.
Your biggest fan,
Alden
Dear Fabian,
Simon or Garfunkel?
John or Paul or George or Ringo?
Rocket Man or Lion King?
Speedrun or Superplay?
Do you miss the attention?
I'm sorry I don't have a juicy relationship problem for you. Have you considered becoming a syndicated columnist? Seriously.
Your biggest fan,
Alden
Garfunkel. Simon wrote the songs and was generally the force behind the music etc so it's a tough choice. Garfunkel has too awesome a voice to ignore though. I mean listen to Bridge Over Troubled Water, sweet mother of god.
Paul. Most of my favorite Beatles songs are by him. Also he's been my favorite since I discovered them at age 7-8.
Rocket Man by a mile, though it's nowhere near my favorite Elton songs. The thing is, with him, he was only really good in the 70s and early 80s. Somewhere in the mid 80s he had some throat surgery which kinda killed his voice so he doesn't sing nearly as well as he used to. His voice nowadays is pretty deep with nowhere near the range he used to have. Early Elton John stuff is fantastic though, easily the best live performer I've ever heard. Incidentally, Simon & Garfunkel might be second on that list.
I dunno. I like speed but I also like small sacrifices to improve entertainment. In general I guess speedrun, but I'm somewhere in between. Problem with superplay is it's pretty likely the author of a movie will make shitty entertainment choices which I won't think are worth it. Leaving fewer things up to personal opinion is probably a good idea in general.
You mean the attention I got the first couple of days of this thread? No I don't miss it. It was kinda neat I guess but I think answering a question or two a day instead of like 50 works pretty well too.
I haven't really considered becoming a columnist, no. I don't really think I could land a job like that, much less keep it. I guess it might be pretty cool now that you mention it, but I'm not convinced it would be very popular. could be a sweet career to end up in though :)
Edit: Also thanks for being a fan. It's nice to have one!
Dear Fabian,
thanks for the advice, your thoughts were helpful. One particular phrasing bothers me though, so here's another question.
Fabian wrote:
She's used to it and as long as she hears an indication she's not the only target of your sexual fantasies, it'll blow over.
She's not the target of my sexual fantasies, I have a strict no-nasty-thoughts-about-friends-policy. That's not always easy to follow (especially in summer), but I found that not allowing nasty thoughts at all helps avoiding those thoughts when she's around, and thus allows me to act more naturally and to resist the urge to stare at her boobies.
Are you less inhibited about fantasizing than me? How do you deal with the problem of acting mating-ready around girls? Do you simply not care, do you use other tactics, or is that just not a problem for you?
Dear Fabian,
thanks for the advice, your thoughts were helpful. One particular phrasing bothers me though, so here's another question.
Fabian wrote:
She's used to it and as long as she hears an indication she's not the only target of your sexual fantasies, it'll blow over.
She's not the target of my sexual fantasies, I have a strict no-nasty-thoughts-about-friends-policy. That's not always easy to follow (especially in summer), but I found that not allowing nasty thoughts at all helps avoiding those thoughts when she's around, and thus allows me to act more naturally and to resist the urge to stare at her boobies.
Are you less inhibited about fantasizing than me? How do you deal with the problem of acting mating-ready around girls? Do you simply not care, do you use other tactics, or is that just not a problem for you?
Ah, staring at boobies, one of life's great pleasures. I have very few (2) male friends, almost all of my friends in life so far have been female. I stare at them way, way too much, I just hope they don't notice too often (though how couldn't they?) or I'd feel really bad about it. If they do notice, they've always been nice enough to not ask me to stop.
Anyway, that's ambitious of you to have that policy. To be honest I think it's taking the idea a little bit too far, but if you think it works for you then good for you. Even though you have this policy, your friend doesn't know it, and after your talk the other night she thinks you do have nasty thoughts about her. That's not really a big deal though, as covered in my previous response.
So to answer your questions, it definitely sounds I'm less inhibited about fantasizing. That's not necessarily a good thing though, we could probably meet somewhere in the middle and be better off for it. I don't really see it as a problem I guess, my thoughts are my own and it's not like I'm creepily hitting on my friends. I probably might if I had a shot though, or if I was sufficiently drunk around them. Yeah I'm a sleezebag.
I'm not really sure what you meant exactly by acting mating-ready around chicks and all that. If these answers weren't good, just clarify and I'll give it another shot. Also to all my friends who stumbled upon this by googling me (you weirdos), I'm not actually quite this bad so please don't stop talking to me entirely, thanks.
Also something I just thought of. These lasts couple of posts of yours tell me you're probably not aggressive enough around girls. I mean girls you actually like, not your friends. Do you agree?
I'm not really sure what you meant exactly by acting mating-ready around chicks and all that.
well, acting like you'd want sex. Which includes, but is not limited to, gazing at certain parts of her body. Looks like you don't care much, which is probably ok if your friends can handle it (or even accept it as a compliment). :)
Fabian wrote:
These lasts couple of posts of yours tell me you're probably not aggressive enough around girls. I mean girls you actually like, not your friends. Do you agree?
I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about. What do you mean by being "aggressive", and why can't I "actually like" friends?
Well, I'll try my best to answer:
Sure, I'm an antisocial geek and shy (who on this forum isn't?), but if there's a girl I want, I'm not going to sit at home waiting for her to fall in love with me. She'll know, sooner or later, and I'll do my best to be presentable (the things you mentioned to Warp). The problem with offense is that I wouldn't get subtle hints to stop, and I don't want to annoy her to the point that it'll ruin a friendship.
By "actually like" I meant interested in more than a friendship. It sounds like you have things under control though, all things considered. A very general thing which will apply to most people, not just you, is it's likely better in the long run to be as forward as possible when it comes to chicks you're interested. Most of the time there's not much sense in trying to preserve a friendship after you've been shot down when asking her out or whatever. That's a whole 'nother post though, I just thought of it when I read this: "..and I don't want to annoy her to the point that it'll ruin a friendship."
Dear FabAttack,
What's the best gift you've ever received?
What's the best gift you've ever given?
Chamillitary mayne,
JXQ
I've never been into gifts. I try to avoid them, mostly because it's too much work and effort. I hate getting gifts, I hate how you have to feel happy about them and show your appreciation because the person who got it for you put in all this thought (and money) in something I probably don't need or will use. It makes me feel extremely bad and guilty and if I could somehow avoid ever getting a gift again I'd jump at it in a second.
That said I got some great gifts when I was younger. My first cellphone when I turned 15 and my first mp3 player when I turned 16 were both great and have obviously had a great effect on my everyday life (I spent 2 hours on a bus every day in high school so that mp3 player was quite neat).
The only significant gift I can recall giving was when I was 8 and my mom always talked about quitting smoking. I gave her nicotine gums and a bicycle helmet because she always said we had to wear helmets when out with our bikes, yet she never wore one. Looking back on it now I think it's kinda sweet, but she never used either gift and it hurt a little.
Nowadays birthday/christmas is not a big deal, I mostly get some underwear from mom and maybe a book or some sheet music as well as maybe a joke gift or something. I'd still prefer nothing but overall it's not too bad. I'll know in a few days (birthday coming up) :)
Looking back at human development, why do you think that there has been so much development in technology but so little development in terms of the human psyche?
Let me elaborate. The number of groundbreaking technological innovations of the last two centuries vastly outnumber those of the rest of the millenium. We have sent men to space, found cures for various diseases and even produced digital watches - things that were thought impossible not too long ago. However, I feel that the development of the human psyche has not been as... rapid. Why so few? If you think of it, there hasn't been that many new ideas about God or the ego or our place in the word since Aristotele. No new perspectives on the world we live in. Is it a mere result of evolution - that the traits of "the philosophical mind" has never been rewarded and therefore diminished in expression, or is it just a matter of lazyness?
Looking back at human development, why do you think that there has been so much development in technology but so little development in terms of the human psyche?
Let me elaborate. The number of groundbreaking technological innovations of the last two centuries vastly outnumber those of the rest of the millenium. We have sent men to space, found cures for various diseases and even produced digital watches - things that were thought impossible not too long ago. However, I feel that the development of the human psyche has not been as... rapid. Why so few? If you think of it, there hasn't been that many new ideas about God or the ego or our place in the word since Aristotele. No new perspectives on the world we live in. Is it a mere result of evolution - that the traits of "the philosophical mind" has never been rewarded and therefore diminished in expression, or is it just a matter of lazyness?
First, nice hitchhiker reference!
From a purely developmental/evolutionary standpoint (I'll cover philosophy later), there's been plenty of progress, but not very recently. This isn't surprising, since the process of evolution is slow as hell. This is mostly physical rather than psychological of course, like developing the ability to speak and abstract thinking, that kind of stuff. Without this type of development though, the technological revolution you speak of wouldn't have happened, since our mind wouldn't be capable of it. Anyway, since this, by definition, is such a slow thing, we can't really notice it and therefore not appreciate it.
The thing about philosophy though, is that most people don't care about it nowadays. This wasn't true say 2000 or 10000 years ago, because we knew nothing about science at that point. We needed explanations to stuff and we didn't have the means to find out. This is (partly) why religion had such an enormous impact back then, and continued to all the way up until the last 2 centuries maybe. Religion created answers for things we couldn't understand, and now with the advances in technology and knowledge there are fewer things we can't explain through science. This all ties in nicely with philosophy in general because as the number of tricky questions go down (in a general sense), the need to spend time thinking about those tricky questions go down too, and it's especially true for the everyday person like you or me. We don't have to come up with any new worldviews because we can explain it all pretty nicely with the scientific one.
if the technological advances of our time has decreased the need to explain natural phenomena, does that mean that there is less need for religion today? if that is true, do you think _science_ will in some day change the way we see God today?
if the technological advances of our time has decreased the need to explain natural phenomena, does that mean that there is less need for religion today? if that is true, do you think _science_ will in some day change the way we see God today?
Yes on all counts and I think it's already happening, in some places more than others. There are other very important (perhaps even more important) reasons why religion is getting increasingly obsolete too, but they're beyond the scope of this question.
In a century or two, I think science will be able to explain stuff like how the universe was created exactly, and we'll be able to conclude there's no need for a supernatural force behind it. At first, religious people will incorporate it into their faith (much like evolution has been in the last 50 years), but over time, as fewer and fewer compelling reasons to assume the need for divine intervention exist, fewer and fewer parents will raise their children in a religious environment. How fast this process will be is anyone's guess (in a thread about this very subject a year or two ago I guessed only a few more generations, and I don't think it's an unreasonable estimate), but it's very tricky to deny it hasn't already started, if you compare how many people were religious say 300 years ago and how many are today.
In a century or two, I think science will be able to explain stuff like how the universe was created exactly, and we'll be able to conclude there's no need for a supernatural force behind it.
things like that have been explained long ago without "science". and the universe wasn't created in the past (memory), so as long as science continues to search the past they will not find the cause which is the mind, god, which creates everything in the present moment, like in a dream.
science hasn't explained things any better than religion, they just replaced gods with "natural laws" and "chance". and much like religious people, they don't understand the origin of their "gods" (causes).
the good thing about science is that they have gone much deeper into the physical specifics of causes than religions did, which has resulted in many good inventions like toasters and computers. science can't explain much, but it can create many new things, because they have such detailed descriptions on how the magical forces make the universe work.
the good thing about science is that they have gone much deeper into the physical specifics of causes than religions did, which has resulted in many good inventions like toasters and computers. science can't explain much, but it can create many new things, because they have such detailed descriptions on how the magical forces make the universe work.
Not everything unknown is automatically magical. The history has a host of examples for that. We have yet to determine which of the yet unexplained phenomena are magic and which are just us looking at it from the wrong side. Give humanity some time!
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Dear Fabian,
on the off-chance that you actually care, my problem has been sorted out.
There was a good opportunity to get back to that topic yesterday (wasn't planned, just lucky) and it turned out she hadn't even taken our response seriously, she just felt a little insulted because that was obviously no polite reply to the question. I apologized, set the record straight, we've talked for about 5 hours, and all was well.
thanks again for your point of view on the issue, it did help.
That's funny because it's exactly what magic is: something unknown, something we don't understand. For example, people used to think that lightning was magic, that it was created by some angry God. But when science explained it, it was no longer magic.
The funny thing is that lightning/electricity is still magic, like everything else, because science only thought they explained it. Science only explained a small part. To explain something fully so that it becomes real instead of magic is impossible because every explanation needs an explanation.
Einstein said that "either everything is magic or nothing is". But Socrates was smarter because he knew that he knew nothing, so he knew that it was all magic (unexplainable).
Dear Fabian,
on the off-chance that you actually care, my problem has been sorted out.
There was a good opportunity to get back to that topic yesterday (wasn't planned, just lucky) and it turned out she hadn't even taken our response seriously, she just felt a little insulted because that was obviously no polite reply to the question. I apologized, set the record straight, we've talked for about 5 hours, and all was well.
thanks again for your point of view on the issue, it did help.
Sure I cared, good to hear things are alright now. I hope you used those 5 hours to talk about other things than how you don't want to have sex with her though :)
Fabian, Oh Wise one,
If TASvideos were to form its own country and government, and you were chosen as leader, what positions would you appoint other members to? Feel free to take this in a humorous or serious fashion.
Fabian, Oh Wise one,
If TASvideos were to form its own country and government, and you were chosen as leader, what positions would you appoint other members to? Feel free to take this in a humorous or serious fashion.
I'd form a council to have some people to discuss everything I'd have to decide/rule on/etc. In the end though, these people would have no actual power, I want to decide for myself. Just want someone's input/feedback first so I don't make crappy decisions. People on this council would be DK, JXQ, moozooh, Zurreco, xebra, adelikat.
Then we'd need two people to handle the bureaucratic side of things. Filing papers in the right filing cabinet, keeping track of inter-departmental memo's, putting down council discussions on paper for the records, stuff like that. I'll put Bisqwit and Warp here.
I would of course require a personal "assistant" if you know what I mean. Who to choose, who to choose.. I'm going to go with meepers here.
We'd need a head of the justice department, a head judge. I think JXQ could handle that job.
I think Cardboard would do a good job in charge of law enforcement. He'd have Phil, Saturn and AKA to order around, being police officers will suit these guys well. Cardboard would also have a side job by night, handling the adult movie industry.
Outside the gates of the government palace (this is where your leader will live, party and work), I imagine there would be a constant stream of protesters parading around with cool looking signs saying "Fabian sucks lol", "More money to me", "less justice in society!" etc. The leaders of these groups would be Xkeeper, Vatchern and mwl. Not sure if they have a day job too, I'm guessing they don't.
Ok I'm getting bored now. Let's just say I'd handle the rest myself!
Fabian,
If you could achieve any miracle, which ones would they be?
If I had magical powers, I would use those powers to make very hot women have sex with me, a lot. I'd also try to change around the distribution of wealth in society, so people in third world countries would no longer starve to death etc, and I'd erase religion from people's minds, as well as making sure people in a position of power (except for myself!) can't be too power hungry -> no wars etc.
