response 85 of 155:

Dec 6 00:47 UTC 2001

<laugh>

response 87 of 155:

Dec 6 02:14 UTC 2001

I agree with michaela.  I believe that asking "would you like to go on 
a date" is likely to earn you more "no"'s than asking "would you like 
to <adjective + activity> with me sometime?".  I don't know that for 
certain, though.

response 89 of 155:

Dec 6 02:15 UTC 2001

87 slipped in.  

Yes, but *why*?  

response 91 of 155:

Dec 6 08:46 UTC 2001

flembo, to my knowledge and to my practice there is no constraint against
straight-forward propositions of any nature, there is no real need to play
the game. at a party, smiling, tilting the head, squinting the eyes a little,
sipping your drink and saying "let's go somewhere private" is pretty
straightforward.
the only time i like being coy, gamey, asking a girl to sit down for coffee
or saying "hey let's go for a walk" (try it) is like challenging a player to
a game of chess or poker, because it's the game and the conversation will be
a succession of questions, get-to-know-me content, and clever banter. the
questions and the clever banter are the game part. if she's not up to your
skill level in these two areas, i suggest two options: 1) steer her through
her own content with carefully laid questioning, if you're interested -- if
you're not interested, then, 2) ask her for a handjob. tell her what she's
saying isn't all that interesting, and a handjob is about all she's worth to
you now.

response 93 of 155:

Dec 6 14:30 UTC 2001

So you prefer asking for handjobs instead of dates?

response 95 of 155:

Dec 6 17:35 UTC 2001

I guess what I'm really objecting to is not the decision whether or not to
refer to it as a date, but the attempt to play it both ways.  So, paraphrasing
from (admittedly feeble) memory:  "ask them out for coffee, *carefully
avoiding the word 'date'*, and then if it doesn't work out, you won't have
ruined your friendship"  (emphasis mine)  
  Why do people think that if they admit their interest, it will negatively
impact the existing friendship?  

response 97 of 155:

Dec 7 01:53 UTC 2001

I love lelande.  :)

response 99 of 155:

Dec 7 03:12 UTC 2001

Exactly...that's what a date USED to be...getting to know someone better.

response 101 of 155:

Dec 8 02:24 UTC 2001

I think someone's been reading a little too much into what I posted.

There are some people who are fickle enough that they won't be your 
friends if you unsucessfully ask them out.

response 103 of 155:

Dec 10 02:21 UTC 2001

depends on whether or not you want to try "saving" them.

response 105 of 155:

Dec 11 06:10 UTC 2001

it's a strategy. that much can be said. after about the 4th month of nothing
"just happening", most folks i know start to shop for new strategies.

response 107 of 155:

Dec 13 03:07 UTC 2001

Lot to digest here.

I'm curious why no one has used the word "courting."  "Dating" is 
commonplace, but the former term seems to be almost archaic in most 
contexts.

I've thought a lot about this, and I think I agree with sentiments that 
a lasting relationship takes time, practice, and a lot of planning.  
Managing one needs a lot of work and constant maintainance, which 
unfortunately, I suppose many have forgotten about or don't quite 
understand.

I hope you'll forgive me when I relate my own experiences, especially 
those in church settings, but I think it's appropriate.  I agree with 
what's been said about friendship; so much pressure is put upon 
striving to impress and satisfying the immediate desires of sex.

For those who would ballyhoo the church context I'm about to explain, 
let me say that I found the intents and ideals I was presented with to 
be very, very helpful.  First of all, I had a lot of time in church 
youth groups to get to know others in an unthreatening context.  There 
were a lot of group activities that were structured in such a way that 
expectations were fairly low and we had a chance to get to know each 
other.  More importantly, we were encouraged to think about what 
qualities we would seek for in a mate, and what goals we wanted to 
accomplish with such a person.  We were encouraged to think if a temple 
marriage was something we wanted (and yes, it has to be an individual 
decision.)

There's some important points there.  We were given opportunities to 
mix without all the pressure, while we had time to think about what we 
really wanted.  It was gradually explained and emphasized more and more 
as we got older.  I can't think of many places where we were otherwise 
encouraged to start thinking about such things at such a young age-- it 
began, more or less, when we were about 12.

The LDS Church discourages dating before the age of 16, and when I 
finally did reach that age, I began to see some of the reasons why.  
Although sex wasn't a big factor in the first few years, a lot of my 
experiences were distastrous.  I dated so many girls that had unreal 
expectations sometimes, hoping I would be more.. impressive, I guess.  
I had a lot of problems growing and it was an awkward time for me.

I realized I had a much easier time when I dated friends, and when I 
went on group dates where friendship was a stronger factor than the 
expectation of making some sort of love connection.  It was easier for 
me to relax and be myself, which I think most here would agree is 
important: to be yourself and not try to be someone you are not.  In 
fact, it was the foundation that Julie and I built on.

I met her at a church function.  Again, I know people tend to discount 
religion, but it is an area where you know you are meeting people that 
share your moral and ethical principles-- your way of life.  (Granted, 
you do more checking when you meet and start talking.)

Julie is a touchy-feely sort of person, and so I misread her nonverbal 
language at first, but I felt free when I made it clear that I wanted 
to keep the terms on friendship at that time.  Then I realized that I 
liked the way the relationship was growing.  It was friendly at first, 
and warmed into affection that built its way into intimacy.  We also 
decided upon marriage-- and a covenanted one at that in one of our 
church temples, before our intimacy was fully consummated.

It is my firm belief that sexual contact does form a bond of some sort--
 I don't think many would disagree with me there, and that is why I 
have held to the principle (as best as I have been able) of keeping it 
within my marriage.  There are so many elements to a relationship, and 
not all of them are sexual, but I do think it is easier to have the 
former in place before the latter are added, as I think sex is a good 
mortar to the bricks of a relationship.

I suppose there may be some that question some choices I have made in 
the past, and may think me a hypocrite.  Some, I know, have questioned 
my integrity in such matters.  That topic will remain for another item.

To summarize-- go meet a mate where you share common interests, 
especially if those interests are fundamental and agreeable to your 
character.  You can meet them anywhere, but I do believe organizations 
(and not all may be religious) that espouse your particular creed, 
philosophy, or way of living tend to be the best places to go.

Clubs, bars, and the Internet, as said, are fine, but sex usually is 
more the emphasis.