Story Time: Business or Pleasure

49 thoughts on Story Time: Business or Pleasure

1. sometimes, and I recognize this is like the most immature/petty/silly response to have to this issue, I have these moments of just being like “man, I hate sex for screwing up totally normal interactions.” honestly, I’m not sure this problem wouldn’t exist even if the world weren’t super-sexist :/ I mean, lord knows I’ve complained in the past about guys not realizing that I was totally hitting on them oh my god how could they be so stupid anyway, so it’s not like I can blame non-skeezy guys for hitting on ladies in confusing/subtle ways. I don’t know how to deal with/read situations like this either, sadly. I mean, maybe he started out with friendly intentions because he’s a really friendly guy, and then he realized he could use your expertise, and as the conversation progressed he realized you were super awesome/thought the two of you clicked well/whatever and then decided to hit on you. I guess maybe that’s kind of skeezy at a business function, but I dunno. confusing indeed.

2. Okay, is it totally skeezy for a guy to be attracted to someone who’s in a related industry? Because wouldn’t the fact that they’re in related industries mean that they would have … interests in common? And isn’t meeting people with interests in common one way of finding a Significant Other who has interests in common? Unless the guy was significantly skeevier than presented here, I don’t see that bad things transpired, necessarily. I don’t know that I’d go out dancing with our UPS guy – unless, of course, he asked me. Are you saying that business and personal HAVE to be mutually exclusive? Because that would cut quite a few people who work long hours in their industries out of meeting people with social potential. My folks worked in the same business, and it didn’t prevent them from having a good marriage.

   Can the guy you met not buy left-handed wingdangers from you, and then occasionally go out dancing with you? And “you should come” sounds as if he’s doing his best to make it clear that he’s NOT trying to hit you up for a date – just, maybe, you would find you had something else in common, but you should not feel trapped.

   It doesn’t sound to me as if anything untoward transpired, or that the guy was being at all improper. It sounds as if he just liked you, is all.

3. “How the hell am I supposed to know if a man is actually interested in doing business with me and not just hitting on me? “

   If you get asked about your non-business life, at a party, that can go either way. People at parties discuss things which are not business related; otherwise it wouldn’t be much of a party.

   However, if you get asked to do something which is entirely unrelated to business, and if the invitation isn’t coming from someone with whom you have an established business relationship… it’s not business, it’s a pick up.

   S, assuming that all these people are female, here are some “no pickup” examples:

   If I ask a corporate officer of a client to have a “business lunch” and we talk about cases: business.

   If I run into a corporate officer of a client and we have coffee: business, even if we don’t schedule it for the purpose of business.

   If I become friends with that same corporate officer because we are working together so much, and she and I have a friendly lunch: not business, but not a pickup.

   And here are some “pickup” examples (using a guy named “joe” 🙂

   If Joe meets someone for the first time at a party and asks them out to anything but a meeting in one of their offices: pickup. (Existing clients get to have coffee and lunch. New clients get an office meeting. Anything else means they want to pick you up.)

   If joe asks anyone out to an obviously non-business affair (dinner, dancing, party, drinks) without inviting a variety of other people from both offices: pickup.

   So… this guy? He was picking you up, for sure. I cannot imagine a single example in my life where I would ever have asked someone to go dancing as a business lead-in. (If he was a DJ and you a radio jockey, perhaps it’s a different story.)

4. Maybe he thinks if he goes out with you or whatever, you’ll do your expertise-thing for him for free.

5. Hm, well, there’s no way to go back and figure out that situation itself now. But what I would suggest next time is to ask about his workplace and the structure of his workplace. Is his go-to guy a go-to girl? Are many of his co-workers and employees close personal friends? Does he have a happy marriage to a woman who doesn’t stay at home and do his dishes? Is he actually a guy guy straightening it up for the same reason you’re wearing makeup and heels? A little digging may leave you pleasantly surprised.

   So, if the guy starts gushing about how great his team is and mentions that they all like to go drinking together, you are talking to someone who is likely very interested in giving you a job, because he thinks you (a) have the necessary skills and (b) will fit in with his friends. Again, this is only likely if he has demonstrated that (b) is as important to him personally as (a).

   That said – if he gives you the Dov Charney vibe for any reason, or describes a workplace devoid of women or devoid of camaraderie, you’re probably better of just giving him your card and ignoring his phone calls. Some men cannot get past their own personal concept that women are ALWAYS present ONLY for their physical gratification. Even if you have the best CV in the room, all they see is the heels.

6. La BellaDonna, it’s not so much that I think he’s being improper or skeevy. I wouldn’t even label this as harassment or anything like that, it’s just a matter of knowing what’s actually happening in the situation.

   If I think we’re making friendly conversation while trying to get some business but really a guy just wants to date me or something, that doesn’t make him a bad person, it just totally changes the dynamic.

   Isabel, I hear ya homie! It would be way easier to figure out what’s going on in these situations if there wasn’t so much sexism all the damn time.

   And Sailorman, nope, not a DJ or anything related to music at all. Then, yeah, I probably would’ve thought nothing of it.

7. I write from the reverse perspective: as a friendly (and very happily married) male, I have no interest in picking anyone up. But I always have to be aware of that line so I don’t appear> to cross it–the last thing i want is to have someone think I’m hitting on them!

   My own theory from when i was single used to be that parties were rarely for business. Talking business with someone you don’t know was usually just an ice breaker, intended as an entry into more personal conversation. My 0.02 is that the discussion of your business was in that category. I don’t know if “wanting to date you” is a proper description for someone you just met, but it sounds like “thinks you’re cute and wants to meet you again.”

   You can also tell the vibe by how much he talks about his business, and by how much he asks you business-related followups to your statements. A “one way” business conversation isn’t really talking business, unless you are getting a sales pitch.

   And finally: both business, friendship, and emotional relationships take a bit of time to develop, right? And they often mix. I’ve had people who I thought I wanted to date but who ended up being friends, and people who started out as friends and ended up being clients, and most other combinations. I met my wife at work, and so did a lot of people.

   Unless you are in one of those professions like mine (where you can’t mix business and pleasure) there’s always the possibility of doing both.

8. I was at a networking thing recently where a woman was totally interested in my business until I mentioned, relevantly to something about the business, my girlfriend.

   Funny how that conversation shifted. In retrospect, I don’t think it was a business conversation in the first place. Oh well, it would have been cool to work with Deloitte.

9. I can totally relate to the confusion here, and have had similar things happen to me. He could be a perfectly decent, non-skeevy guy who wants to date you, but it makes life awkward especially if you don’t want to date him. Because now you are in a situation where you want to keep up a friendly relationship with him in order to get his business, without at the same time giving him the impression that you want to date him. That’s probably impossible to do. I usually mention my husband if I am getting that “hitting on” vibe, but it sucks to have to do that.

   The other situation that is frustrating is that it can be very hard for a woman to network in a male-dominated industry because there are certain things you can’t do with male clients because they seem too date-like. Lunch or coffee is fine. But one of my male competitors recently took a mutual male client of ours on a kayaking trip — just the two of them. There is no way I could have done that kind of one-on-one activity with that client without it being weird. I don’t think this is a matter of sexism (other than the sexism that led to the industry being male-dominated in the first place) , but it is frustrating. Gaah.

10. frau sally benz, it sounds to me as if he was at the networking event, networked with you (good business contact!) talked to you for a while longer (interesting person to talk to!), and maybe wanted to get to know you better (different social event, NOT described as a “date”). I’m a little uncertain (…frequently), but to me, “you should come” is much more autonomous than “we should go”. “You should come” implies that you get there when YOU choose, IF you so choose, stay as long as it pleases you, and leave when you so desire, without having to decide what to do with him at the end of your participation there (Coffee? Peck on the cheek? Handshake? Bludgeon?). It sounds a little bit as if he’d like to get to know you better, but without pressuring you – which is oddly refreshing.

    That said, I’m with Another Laurie – at the moment, it just isn’t possible, generally, for women to network as freely in the same way with men as other men do – and the reverse is also true.

11. I’m going to quibble slightly with Sailorman here:

    (Existing clients get to have coffee and lunch. New clients get an office meeting. Anything else means they want to pick you up.)

    Exception: when neither one of you really have an office to speak of. I have coffee meetings with women (and men) all the time, purely business, and I don’t think anyone’s felt misled. But what passes for my “office” is a dining room table, and that would be weird, definitely more intimate than just hanging out at the coffee joint.

12. I hated when this used to happen to me (doesn’t anymore). It’s easier to find out if you’re not in fact interested in dating the guy in question, because then, you can just mention your S.O. (gf, bf, whatever) in a “business-related” context, like oh, he helps you out by giving you Photoshop advice, and see how the dynamic changes, if at all. Of course you can totally make it all up. Just observe the reaction. If he cools off and seems less interested, definitely it’s because he was picking you up. If he still seems interested he is either all business or doesn’t mind adultery 🙂 One way or the other, though, a business contact met in the context of business should, ideally, remain at a business level, if only because when a personal relationship goes belly up, the business goes away with it. So when a guy asks you to dance and you want the business more than the date, you can always say you’d rather meet just for coffee or lunch. Interested or not, he should show some respect for your boundaries.

13. My question is “Would your reaction be the same if it had been a woman?”.

14. I think it’s debatable as to if this guy really was hitting on you but I think it was an inappropriate remark, specially if there is the prospect of a real business relationship developing. Not that romatic relationships can’t come from business relationships, but there’s a time and a place and this isn’t it.

    I have a friend in her early 20’s who met a much older man at a work function who offered to (and would have legitimately been able to) help her with a work project she had. Except he was so busy he couldn’t possibly get together to work on it except at dinner on Saturday night. Just…ew. My friend is just young enough and just new enough at her job not to know if this was legit or not (luckily her boss set her straight).

15. The guy’s comment was completely inappropriate. Unfortunately, there is a high likelihood that he wasn’t fully aware of how inappropriate it was: Clueless Het Guy is clueless.

    (Clueless Het Guy: that guy who thinks if he’s interested in you, you must be exactly or even more interested in him, and proceeds on that basis, not realising he’s freaking you out like Scary Stalker Guy until you actually tell him “No” – and it’s got to be a direct, in his face, use the word “No”, refusal – because Clueless Het Guy won’t hear anything else.)

    He’s attracted to you. Possibly he is also interested in your professional skills, but it seems likely he is primarily attracted to you and approached you accordingly.

    If you’re attracted to him, despite his being Clueless Het Guy, you can call him up and suggest you go out dancing.

    If you’re not attracted to him, and frankly as a lesbian I can never understand why anyone would ever find Clueless Het Guy attractive: well, he made a polite pass at a professional networking event, which was a faux pas but probably a forgiveable one.

16. Jesurgislac hits the nail on the head, and I love the concept of the Clueless Het Guy! I have met so many of those.

    The other aspect of the Clueless Het Guy is that, because he is attracted to you, he will relate to you only or primarily on that level, remaining completely oblivious to the fact that you may have another agenda, i.e. a business agenda. After all, he is attracted to you so that is what matters here. So everything you do will be interpreted in that light and he will fail to consider that you have your own interests to pursue (such as getting his business) that have nothing to do with his attraction to you.

17. How the hell am I supposed to know if a man is actually interested in doing business with me and not just hitting on me?

    Ask him.

18. A Guy In Denver, I’d say it’s more awkward to respond with “are you hitting on me?” than to just go with the flow and keep making conversation. If he is, he might lie and say he’s not, and if he isn’t, then there goes the business opportunity.

    And Deltabob, that’s basically at the heart of the matter: the fact that I don’t know what the intent is. Because most men who talk about going dancing with them are hitting on me, but most women who talk about going dancing with them are not. So when you take something like that and apply it to a business setting, I want to believe they are not hitting on me, but I have to wonder.

    I’m at least happy (not really the appropriate word but the closest I can find) that I’m not the only one who gets confused about what’s going on in these situations. I think in the future, I’ll try a combo of the suggestions here: mention a significant other, ask more about his work life & the culture there, etc. Awesome advice =)

    1. Yeah, really … while I’m sure that there are some women out there who would feel comfortable asking that question, it seems to me to be a pretty big display of privilege and lack of awareness of gender/power dynamics to just assume that it’s always going to be a safe and/or reasonable option available to every woman.

19. @ Guy in Denver – the OP is absolutely right. Men lie, because they don’t want to “show their hand” in case they get “humiliated”. The only way to find out is to a) sabotage the business end of things by smoking the guy out and insisting he show his cards; or b) sabotaging the business relationship by “offending” him because he may think you are “assuming too much”. See, if a woman “assumes” a man might be interested, who does she think she is. If, however, she does *not* assume anything, well, if something inappropriate happens, any male a$$hole will just say “she should have known” and “she was asking for it” – in other words, it’s always the woman’s fault. Sure, not all guys will react like this but it only takes one to ruin your professional life. I know too much about this already.

20. Another thing about “just asking” the men: another reason they won’t tell you is because if a man is a predator, confusion and ambiguity work in his favour. The less he admits, the less liable he may appear should anything happen. If a woman doesn’t know his intentions then he can say “how was I supposed to know”, and so on. If he lies and says no, or he says yes and you then turn him down to set him straight, then the business is gone but there could be worse consequences, even if you don’t want the business: for example, he could get nasty and talk behind your back. You won’t find out until someone tells you and won’t be able to sue him, because as long as he doesn’t say it in front of you and another witness, it isn’t slanderous and it’s only hearsay. This is what happened to me, so I understand the OP completely.

21. There seems to be a lot of assuming the worst about the guy in question. Subtlety and ambiguity don’t have to be the enemy. It’s also perfectly plausible that he thinks OP is attractive, and is trying to find out if she’s interested in him the same way by making some vague suggestions and seeing how she responds. I don’t see a need to assign dire motives until there’s some evidence for them.

    As for whether or not it’s appropriate – I can’t really say. At least in my current position, a ‘networking function’ is mostly a chance to meet and make social connections with other people who work in the same sort of socially isolating job. It’s much more a social thing than a business thing, and I’m not really familiar with the sort of gathering OP describes.

22. That’s why I always stay home.

23. You’re right that asking him is not a panacea. But it’s a starting point. “I know he’ll lie so I have no choice but to be manipulative and indirect”…well, I can understand why you bought the ticket, but let’s not ride the crazy train. That way lies madness.

24. It’s interesting, isn’t it, that both libdevil and definitely A Guy In Denver are coming across as Clueless Het Guys in this discussion?

25. @Jesurgislac – maybe because they are

26. Libdevil, I think the main problem here is not that a man might come on to a woman – it’s that women (and men!) are frequently in delicate situations where their ability to correctly read the intentions of the person playing opposite is paramount, and this is a new situation that Sally thinks is worth exploring. Entrepreneurship is a realm in which men indubitably have socially institutionalized privilege, because it’s a realm women are relatively new to, so it’s certainly a relevant conversation to have with the women’s studies set.

    If I was sitting in a coffee shop and a guy came across with an, “Excuse me, I can’t help but notice you’re reading [book] by [author]….” and a big smile, I would have no trouble discerning that what he is actually saying is, “I think we have something in common, and you are quite attractive! Can I drink my beverage with you in the hopes of getting your phone number?” And, because of the transparency of the situation – we are in a safe space, he has shown himself to be aware that he is interrupting my current occupation (reading), and I am most likely not urgently busy with anything – I would probably respond in a friendly way and at least engage in conversation.

    A networking event is very much unlike my coffee shop scenario in many ways. First of all, as Sally’s post explained, the situation fundamentally lacks transparency. Everyone in the room has multiple motives – they want to look good, they want to solicit business, and some of them are possibly even trying to get laid. Also, very important: we’re now in male-dominated environment, with a possible double standard about sex looming on all sides. Coming on to a guy in this situation could get you labeled as ten kinds of “slut;” misreading a guy’s strictly-business intentions and calling him out on something he’s not actually doing can get you labeled as “crazy” or “frigid.” I don’t have to tell you that in business, a bad first impression likely means you won’t get a chance for a second.

    And thus, in this case, ambiguity is in fact our enemy, because any way we respond – by ignoring the come-on, by challenging it, or by accepting – we stand the chance of losing valuable business opportunities or contacts because of stupid prevailing views and what is and isn’t appropriate behavior for women. Which is why, in a Starbucks, I’d ask you if you wanted to sit down – and at the bar in the Marriott, I’d be second-guessing your every word.

27. I noticed some posters also seem to think that even if he was just harmlessly interested in a non-business way that it would still be appropriate, nevermind the ambiguity. I don’t know, I think it’s a little cruel to put a woman in that position at a business event (Clueless Het Guy alert!).

    I know some women who have picked up at business events, but I can say that when other people found out about it, it did not end well for them, and for the other women who were there. In my field at least, we spend a lot of time working in isolated settings with other consultants, and it is not okay to give the impression that that’s what women consultants are there for. The woman who picked up became That Slut that the wives refused to let their husbands work with (sound familiar?) because they are clearly loose sexual cannons who’d do it with ANYONE (not just another single person in a consensual situation). And the other women were instantly subjected to the leers and suggestions that maybe they’re available too. Or at least… I don’t know how to describe it. It’s like, we’d gotten to a point where the men were accepting that we were capable equals, and then it was Blam! Remind them women they work with might have sexuality… and instantly we’re down a rung again. We worked so, so hard to prove that we were able to do the job, we’re on tenterhooks to ensure that nobody can defame our work with suggestions that we’re somehow “distractions” for the men, or that we even may have slept our way to the positions we’re in, or even got them because the project manager was just apparently so smitten with our looks (I actually got that one when a professor gave me a job a bunch of graduate students had wanted when I was just an undergrad… I don’t think it was true, he said he liked the way I thought about the problems… but now I always wonder. It’s insidious.).

    It’s like that Schrodinger’s Rapist essay, where guys complained “but what if we really like the girl, don’t we deserve to get to approach her or lose all possible chances at happiness?” well… sometimes, tough shit. There are situations when you are just not entitled to make it about your attraction.

28. Ooh, link love time: Schrödinger’s Rapist: or a guy’s guide to approaching strange women without being maced

29. I’m gay, but thanks for asking 🙂

    Sexual interaction in the workplace is kind of tricky, there’s no doubt about it. But this really kind of comes across as special pleading for women; “oh, it’s hard to deal with all these complexities, woe is me”. If women want to be equal, then that seems to kind of require them to suck it up and be equal…and men have to deal with all these ambiguities too. Sure, women have the added burdens of patriarchy and so forth to deal with, but at some point you have to stop worrying about where you got seated and just play the game.

30. yes. Play the game where if we misread the complexities, we lose all, and the man loses nothing. If only we’d just stop complaining and act more like equals!

    1. But this really kind of comes across as special pleading for women; “oh, it’s hard to deal with all these complexities, woe is me”. If women want to be equal, then that seems to kind of require them to suck it up and be equal…

       Uh, am I still on the right blog? I think I must have made a wrong turn somewhere …

31. Being gay means nothing in this case, dude. One of the most sexist tirades I’ve ever been subjected to was at the hands of my gay best friend’s boyfriend. Still men, still don’t get it.

32. I have to say that as a clueless het guy, I’m reading this with much interest. I’m not really a frequenter of professional networking events, it’s just not something people in my field ever do. So I’m not sure how appropriate it is to approach someone in such a setting.

    If it’s the kind of setting and profession where people work long hours and it’s widely understood that it’s hard to make acquaintances out of the office, then I think it’s probably more appropriate. That said, I think I’m coming around to the idea that the onus should be on men to avoid ambiguity in such situations. I’ve known men to get caught in similarly ambiguous situations, but let’s be honest, the worst-case scenarios are never that bad. (Barring some bizarre thunderbolt-from-heaven type of event).

    Women making a pass at men should also be a lot more straightforward as well, if only because they actually want to be effective. I personally wouldn’t mind a woman propositioning me (some men actually do- they feel it’s their “job”), but I don’t think I would recognize it if it happened (though I can obviously only speak for myself).

    Overall, I think the situation could be much improved if people could take rejection in stride and both sides not be awkward about it. Why can’t it be like that? Oh yeah, sexist society.

33. Sorry, I should clarify my statement slightly:

    “I’ve known men to get caught in similarly ambiguous situations, but let’s be honest, the worst-case scenarios are never that bad for men.”

    Fixed.

34. Thanks for the clarification AMoleWithNoRole, and I like hearing your perspective here.

    Guy in Denver, I have to say, you’re kind of amusing me. I’m sure you mean well, but I don’t see how anything that the commenters and I have said come from a “woe is me” p.o.v. We’re not saying that people should feel sorry for us because of this situation, we’re just expressing the frustration that comes from being in it and trying to figure out how to handle it in the future. And this has shit-all to do with equality, so I have no idea where that came from…

35. Overall, I think the situation could be much improved if people could take rejection in stride and both sides not be awkward about it.

    it’s not so much that rejection is awkward, even if he’s a genuinely nice guy who won’t decide to slander you all over the place for doing so (which of course, some women do too), it’s that women’s sexuality can still be such a “dangerous” entity in the workplace, that it can be almost impossible for women to respond in a manner that will be “professional” enough for some observers – and you never know who around you is a potential client or boss that will seize on a hint of sexuality as a reason to discriminate. If it’s a guy asking you out, even with the most professional, smooth expression of disinterest to save yourself the minefield of mixing business with pleasure, it’s the fact that your sexuality came up at all.

    Barring, the potential for career setbacks related to actually being, or being construed as, sexual – which may not rear up at all, there’s just the issue of Being Taken Seriously. In Sally’s case, it sounds like she’s self-employed, and that’s especially nerve-wracking for anyone – do I have what it takes? Can I set myself apart as particularly competent/original? Am I a good enough writer/scientist/widget-maker to make it on my own? You’re thinking about how to sell your ideas/technical skills/professionalism – the things you work on, and take pride in. A lot of people wants to think they got the job because they are good at what they do, and that was recognised (of course, we know this isn’t always true, man or woman – you could have just been the best of the sorry lot available, or the best resume-padder). Many of us take pride in doing our jobs well. It can be hurtful to wonder whether you actually just got attention to your business because some guy wants to bang you. At this point, women are still so raw about being seen for our ideas, our minds – not just our bodies which are still touted as our highest worth (provided it’s “attractive enough”!), many of us would prefer to keep our business and our personal lives separate. At least at first. A first meeting at a conference is just not the best place to let a woman intent on demonstrating the worth of her mind know that you’re into her body. She might not be flattered, but actually rather crushed that, yet again, nobody is listening to what she’s saying.

36. A Guy In Denver: But this really kind of comes across as special pleading for women; “oh, it’s hard to deal with all these complexities, woe is me”. If women want to be equal, then that seems to kind of require them to suck it up and be equal…and men have to deal with all these ambiguities too.

    To a certain extent, closety gay guys working in a professional environment where being outed could cost you your career, have similiar problems to het/bi women being approached by Clueless Het Guy.

    Your cluelessness about why this is a problem suggests that either you are one of those fortunate gay men who has never needed to worry about what happens to your career when you get outed at work – or that you are clueless enough not to realise that gay men and straight/bi women have different problems at work. (I specifiy straight/bi because for lesbians the issue is different again: if I am approached by a guy in a politely ambiguous manner at a professional/social event, I’m losing nothing at all by just politely assuming the guy means to be completely professional, because I’m never going to want to go out with him anyway.)

    For Closety Gay Guy, the possibilities are:
    (1) CGG makes a politely ambiguous opening to Cute Straight Guy: Cute Straight Guy is completely oblivious because most straight people are oblivious to the kind of ambiguous opening that closety queers are so good at. No benefit, no harm: CGG moves on.
    (2) CGG makes a politely ambiguous opening to Cute Gay Guy: Cute Gay Guy may:
    (2a) Pretend to be completely oblivious, because he’d rather CGG assume he was straight (consequences as for 1)
    (2b) Make clear that he understands a pass was made (thus covertly coming out to CGG as another gay guy, and keying in to the queer network at that professional association) but also make clear he isn’t personally interested.
    (2c) Respond positively to pass.
    There are no really bad consequences here, providing both CGGs understand the game, and are both good at picking up the understated clues (which, after all: queers who work in a straight environment tend to be good at).

    The potential bad consequences happen if: (3) Closety Gay Guy makes a pass at Cute Straight Guy, and Cute Straight Guy understands a pass was made and makes trouble for CGG with all the weight of his heterosexual privilege; (4) Cute Gay Gay thinks Cute Straight Guy is making a pass, and responds unambiguously, which leads to the same weight-of-heterosexual-privilege-trouble.

    For Het/Bi Woman, the problem is:
    (1) Ambiguously approached by Cute Straight Guy at a professional networking event, she can:
    (1a) Pretend to be completely oblivious – this could lead to Cute Straight Guy badmouthing her as frigid/unattractive, if CSG is sufficiently full of himself to think she shouldn’t have been able to be completely oblivious.
    (1b) If Cute Straight Guy is Clueless Het Guy, pretending to be completely oblivious won’t work: Clueless Het Guy will just ramp up the approach until H/B Woman has to say flatly, outloud, unambiguously, “No!” which targetting/response will also do her reputation no good, since many people will say “she must have led him on!” and many more will say “couldn’t she have been more polite/more tactful?”
    (1c) Respond to Cute Straight Guy’s genuine interest and get the reputation of being a slut who uses these professional networking occasions to get herself hooked up.
    (1d) Respond to Cute Straight Guy’s apparent interest, discover he wasn’t actually that interested (the ambiguity, it turned out, was genuine uncertainty) and get the reputation of being an unsuccessful slut who uses these professional networking occasions to try to get herself hooked up.
    (1e) Discover that Cute Straight Guy and she are actually one true soulmates destined to be together forever, and at their 40th wedding anniversary their Best Man is still telling the story of how they Met Cute at a professional networking event.

    In short; there really aren’t many possibilities for a good outcome for Het/Bi Woman if approached by a professional peer at a professional networking event, no matter how cute he is, no matter how much she thinks he may be seriously interested in her. Because unlike the power differential between two closety gay men clandestinely approaching each other in a heterosexist working environment, the consequences for the man and the woman are not the same.

    And a non-clueless straight man will know this, and if he’s not a complete piece of crap, he’ll pattern his behavior accordingly: he will not use professional networking occasions to make passes, ambiguous or not, at his professional peers, no matter how attractive he finds them. Any straight man who does use networking occasions to make passes, especially if he does so with such ambiguity that it’s left up to the woman to decide if a pass was being made or not, is either completely clueless, or a complete piece of crap, or both.

37. Or he’s trying to express a little bit of interest but without putting overt and public pressure on the woman, and hoping that she’ll respond to the little bit of interest with a little bit of reciprocal interest, and they can mutually ratchet things up one notch at a time.

    And you also leave out “just being out of the closet” as one of my options at work. I understand why people who have been oppressed feel the temptation to be manipulative and indirect to protect themselves.

    But manipulation and indirection suck.

38. @ A Guy in Denver,
    Ahem,

    he will not use professional networking occasions to make passes, ambiguous or not, at his professional peers, no matter how attractive he finds them.

    So simple, no?

39. And you also leave out “just being out of the closet” as one of my options at work.

    Yes, I did.

    Check out the first paragraph of my uber-long comment, in which I explicitly said “To a certain extent, closety gay guys working in a professional environment where being outed could cost you your career, have similiar problems to het/bi women being approached by Clueless Het Guy.”

    Gay guys working in a professional environment where they’re free to be completely out of the closet, do not experience any problems similiar to those of a het/bi woman or a closety gay guy, and therefore the comparison would be inappropriate.

    I understand why people who have been oppressed feel the temptation to be manipulative and indirect to protect themselves.

    But you have no comprehension, apparently, why people who are being oppressed have the need to protect themselves.

40. @Jesurgislac – While all three of the words individually describe me, the capitalized category ‘Clueless Het Guy’ seems to imply a certain set of behaviors that do not apply. Please don’t make assumptions.

41. I have a problem with Guy in Denver’s assumption that a person who does not respond unambiguously to an ambiguous pass is being “manipulative and indirect.” These terms imply moral disapproval of anything less than an unambiguous response. As a woman on the receiving end of an ambiguous pass by a man, why is the burden on me to respond unambiguously? Why must I be the one carrying all the risk, especially when I (a) didn’t create the ambiguity, and (b) as a woman, I am the more vulnerable party in this scenario in light of the sexual double standard and the still-present skepticism of women in a professional environment?

    I find it troubling that anything less than the highly risky manoeuver of direct confrontation in an extremely delicate professional situation that the dude created gets me labeled “manipulative.”

42. Was this ‘workplace’ in function, or just in name?

    I’ve been to putatively-professional events which were really social gatherings in professional clothes (“come and meet other professionals while watching football in a bar!”) And I’ve been to putatively-social events which were clearly professional in nature (“the firm is having a barbecue, and you really must come!”) And of course everything in between.

    At the former “professional” events, picking up would probably be fine, while at the latter “social” events it would not.

    But no matter your sex, if you’re not interested you can say something like “Oh, I don’t mix business with pleasure; thank you for the invitation.” or “Oh, I’m trying hard to only meet clients in the office; I hate to take work home.” Or a variety of other completely neutral-seeming, defensible, responses.

    Those responses communicate your lack of social interest and simultaneously avoid giving offense if you are misreading the offer. Then the burden passes to the other party to clarify: they can schedule a meeting with you in your office (they liked you for your work,) move on to talk with someone else (they wanted to date you and understand you not to be interested,) or say “oh, I don’t want to know you through business” and then ask you out (they wanted to date you and do not understand that you’re not interested.)

    But the ambiguity works well, if the setting provides for it. And FWIW, it works for both sides, allowing either party to imply interest and/or lack thereof. Or at least, I always thought it did. I find it interesting that the ambiguous nature of the pickup is being described as more dangerous–predatory, almost, and certainly oppressive

    It seems to me that the point of ambiguity in this setting is to allow either person to more politely extricate themselves. That’s how it usually works.

    And in that same vein it wouldn’t make any sense to require the OP (or any person) to say “are you picking me up?” because that takes it out of plausible-deniability mode. But there are plenty of ways to decline without going so far as that.

    And I might finally add: The difficulty of wondering “what does that person want from me?” is far from an issue that women alone face. It happens in the office, at networking events, and in public. They may want to date you, they may want to sleep with you once; they may want to sell you something; they may want to get your client list; they may want to hire you; they may want your work for free; they may want pretty much anything. The societal imbalance makes things worse for women in general, no denying that. But it’s an issue that is worse for women, not an issue that only applies to women.

43. I also think this accusation of being “manipulative” is classic sexism. Women get put into these double binds, where they can’t be direct but then are accused of being “manipulative” and “indirect.” Men have more of a privilge to be “direct” and “directness” is then considered a huge virtue.

    Interestingly, however, in this scenario Clueless Het Dude was anything but direct. He had something to lose (i.e. being embarrassed if his request for a date were rejected) so he indirectly hinted around so he could get a feel if his attraction was reciprocated while maintaining plausible deniability. I think most people tend to be indirect when directness is a risk, but generally only women get blamed for indirectness.

44. I have a problem with Guy in Denver’s assumption that a person who does not respond unambiguously to an ambiguous pass is being “manipulative and indirect.” These terms imply moral disapproval of anything less than an unambiguous response. As a woman on the receiving end of an ambiguous pass by a man, why is the burden on me to respond unambiguously? Why must I be the one carrying all the risk, especially when I (a) didn’t create the ambiguity, and (b) as a woman, I am the more vulnerable party in this scenario in light of the sexual double standard and the still-present skepticism of women in a professional environment?

    Thank you, Another Laurie.

45. Honestly there is no substitute for JUST ASKING. It does people the courtesy of assuming they have good intentions and forces skeevy guys to out themselves either by admitting it, or by going massively OTT in defensively covering themselves out. You just say you had a previous client/boss/employee who said the exact same thing and then threw a hissy fit that you didn’t respond, so you are checking, “because once that’s all out of the way we can do some real business.” If he is a skeeve he will be out of there like a shot. If not, he’ll laugh and you’re good. If he’s a sexist, but not interested in you personally and thinks your asking is ridiculous, he won’t have a leg to stand on because you are just going on precedent (if he goes ahead and whines anyway that you are reading too much into it, do you really want to do business with him knowing how he’ll behave all the way through it?). Once you’ve said you’re trying to offload the personal stuff so you can both be professional, then you’ve linked being impersonal to being professional. Either he has to ask you out, or totally back off.

46. Oh my, so much activity on this thread!

    Sailorman, I am not saying this situation is unique to women.

    Another Laurie, thank you for both of your comments. All of it got thumbs up from me.

    Lizzie, I think it depends on the situation and/or the personality. In my experience, I’ve never had somebody be straight up with me when I’ve asked if they were asking me out or romantically interested. Most guys said no but I realized later it was a lie, and a couple of guys were basically like “wow, you sure are full of yourself” and the conversation ended right there. So, I don’t know, it might work for some and in certain situations but I don’t think it’s always the best strategy.

47. Frau Sally Benz, in this particular instance, I at least am inclined to acquit Clueless Het Guy of nefarious intent. It does seem to me that he indicated an interest in getting to know you better, outside the Networking Event, but that he was at some pains not to make it about any kind of “hooking up” at the event itself – from the way you described the situation and CHG’s behaviour, it seemed to me that he was very careful to phrase it in such a way that you might have more interests in common and could find out, if you cared to, in an open-ended encounter. I keep returning to “You should could come!” as being so much more autonomous than “We should go!” – he didn’t put you on the spot with a yes-or-no that you hadn’t had time to think about; he phrased it in a way which made it possible for you to say yes, and follow up if you chose, or not; he didn’t seem to predicate or link anything at the event, which could have made the rest of that event uncomfortable for you. He may have been Clueless Het Guy, leaving you asking questions (and I’d be asking the same ones), but at least under the circumstances he seems to have been Thoughtful Polite Guy.

Comments are currently closed.