Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It’s not that difficult. You can read a person and see if they are receptive to you approaching them.
As far as the “stalking” you can simply block the number. I think this is a good example of mountain out of a molehill.
I have probably not made more approaches simply because I read body language before the approach than approaches I have made. I asserted earlier that body language has become a poorer proxy in the smartphone era for approaching than it was in the pre-smartphone era. In the early 2010s, I was in my late 20s and moved to a new city. I soon became friends with a guy a few years younger than me fresh out of college. I was impressed at how he approached with absolutely zero body language indicators whereas I preferred to have body language indicators. He really opened my eyes up to the fact that women coming of age post mid-2000s were poorer at body language signaling than women who came of age before that. After that awakening, while I preferred to have signaling before approaches, I would approach in the absence of it due to knowing that technology has eroded and will continue to erode social skills, particularly in a mating context.
There is an argument to be made for the mountain out of a molehill point of view, which is an indicator of technological erosion of social skills.
I have probably not made more approaches simply because I read body language before the approach than approaches I have made. I asserted earlier that body language has become a poorer proxy in the smartphone era for approaching than it was in the pre-smartphone era. In the early 2010s, I was in my late 20s and moved to a new city. I soon became friends with a guy a few years younger than me fresh out of college. I was impressed at how he approached with absolutely zero body language indicators whereas I preferred to have body language indicators. He really opened my eyes up to the fact that women coming of age post mid-2000s were poorer at body language signaling than women who came of age before that. After that awakening, while I preferred to have signaling before approaches, I would approach in the absence of it due to knowing that technology has eroded and will continue to erode social skills, particularly in a mating context.
There is an argument to be made for the mountain out of a molehill point of view, which is an indicator of technological erosion of social skills.
There is also an argument to be made for monumental cluelessness like you're exhibiting here.
Should her boss also shoot his shot next time she's in the office?
The cable guy who has her name and address?
Her OB/GYN?
Nothing you're writing here is relevant to the situation in the OP.
Even when off duty? That's going to be a key sticking point here.
No one except me has asked the question of why Ahmed didn't do a face to face interaction first. If he did find her gorgeous and he was proximal to her, that would have been the most productive thing to do. Odds are that a face to face interaction would have taken no more than 30 seconds. Without knowing what this man looks like, I can safely say that this would have been an interaction that would have gone nowhere.
Most of the discussion surrounding this event has been about symptomatic issues. I have approached this situation from the disease perspective and not from the symptomatic perspective.
There are two disease factors at play:
1. The modern mating environment is dysfunctional.
2. Technology, including smartphones, has led to an erosion of social skills.
Until these two factors are addressed, more incidents like this will occur. I perceive that both parties, Ahmed and Ashley, have poor social skills. The filing of this lawsuit is actually a symptom of poor social skills.
This lawsuit may or may not be valid. Lawyers are more able to discuss that element. American Airlines will have good legal representation addressing this.
He was off duty but he was at the place of the employment (the airport!).
#2 factor you outline is correct (erosion of social skills)
There is also an argument to be made for monumental cluelessness like you're exhibiting here.
Should her boss also shoot his shot next time she's in the office?
The cable guy who has her name and address?
Her OB/GYN?
Nothing you're writing here is relevant to the situation in the OP.
This is even less relevant.
"Ahmed" who once worked at American Airlines was off duty at the time. That's going to be an interesting angle in legal proceedings.
Her boss shooting his shot when she's in the office would be way different. I do not think that is advisable. In most companies, that would be frowned upon if not outright banned. He would face difficulty keeping that job and in subsequent job interviews.
If the cable guy meets her at a bar, the gym, the mall, or the grocery store, then yes, he should do it.
If her OB/GYN meets her outside of the OB/GYN office, then he should approach her if he wants to do that.
"Ahmed" who once worked at American Airlines was off duty at the time. That's going to be an interesting angle in legal proceedings.
Her boss shooting his shot when she's in the office would be way different. I do not think that is advisable. In most companies, that would be frowned upon if not outright banned. He would face difficulty keeping that job and in subsequent job interviews.
If the cable guy meets her at a bar, the gym, the mall, or the grocery store, then yes, he should do it.
If her OB/GYN meets her outside of the OB/GYN office, then he should approach her if he wants to do that.
You're being deliberately obtuse, and your "ifs" are just you moving the goalposts. You're falsely framing this interaction as a potential dating situation when it isn't.
He was inappropriate any way you look at it, and starting off by blaming her for her appearance reveals your true motives.
They took no action immediately. They IGNORED HER.
This is from the article in the OP:
Quote:
Frustrated, Barno asked a flight attendant for help, explaining the situation. The crew member reportedly became “furious” with the man's behavior, and confirmed that “Ahmad” worked for the airline.
Barno praised the flight attendant who intervened as “amazingly helpful." And when the flight ultimately landed in the Windy City, American Airlines employees escorted “Ahmad” off the plane, NBC reports.
I have probably not made more approaches simply because I read body language before the approach than approaches I have made. I asserted earlier that body language has become a poorer proxy in the smartphone era for approaching than it was in the pre-smartphone era. In the early 2010s, I was in my late 20s and moved to a new city. I soon became friends with a guy a few years younger than me fresh out of college. I was impressed at how he approached with absolutely zero body language indicators whereas I preferred to have body language indicators. He really opened my eyes up to the fact that women coming of age post mid-2000s were poorer at body language signaling than women who came of age before that. After that awakening, while I preferred to have signaling before approaches, I would approach in the absence of it due to knowing that technology has eroded and will continue to erode social skills, particularly in a mating context.
There is an argument to be made for the mountain out of a molehill point of view, which is an indicator of technological erosion of social skills.
What body language indicators? If a woman isn't aware of your presence, because you catch sight of her from a distance, or you're standing behind her, how can she indicate anything? Besides, you're a stranger, so why would she indicate anything, until you open your mouth and speak, at which point she has something by which to size you up a bit, and determine whether you're coherent, intelligent, considerate or amusing, etc. Until you actually approach her and speak, she doesn't even know you're interested, vs. being some passer-by, so again--no reason to indicate anything.
Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 01-19-2020 at 11:50 AM..
You're being deliberately obtuse, and your "ifs" are just you moving the goalposts. You're falsely framing this interaction as a potential dating situation when it isn't.
He was inappropriate any way you look at it, and starting off by blaming her for her appearance reveals your true motives.
I just want to interject here, that I am sick to High Heaven, and tired, of service personnel trying to insinuate themselves into their customers' lives. It's bizarrely rampant in the town I've been living in, and you get some very strange personalities engaged in it; people from fringe cultures, who don't know the behavioral norms of mainstream society (anywhere! Not even in the country/sub-culture they're from!). Yet they DO know, in many cases, that the employer forbids getting personal with the customers, but they think they can hide their inappropriate behavior from their supervisor/s. These are highly manipulative people, in many cases. These guys scare, or at the least, put off, women customers. Their employer can lose business due to this.
What "Ahmed" did was inappropriate and creepy as all get-out! And the airline, which according to one employee's comment to the passenger, knew he was a problem, should have fired him after the first instance. Why they didn't needs to be explained.
He was inappropriate any way you look at it, and starting off by blaming her for her appearance reveals your true motives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BirdieBelle
You're falsely framing this interaction as a potential dating situation when it isn't.
First off, I did not blame her for her appearance. I simply expressed the point of view that she's not that good looking by most subjective standards. The mere fact that you perceive that as a revelation of my true motives is what I would perceive as an indicator of misandry. This is a mating situation and should be examined through a mating lens. Ahmed was interested in her from a physical attraction perspective. If Ahmed isn't interested in her body, there are no text messages.
There's a situation where there are more single men than single women among those in their 20s-30s in Western United States cities. That is one element of the disease that I identified earlier, which is a poor mating environment. In situations with abundancy of males, there are men who will not have access to sex. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, sexual intercourse is a need on par with food and water for mental well being. When you combine lacking access to a primary human need with the erosion of social skills, you get outcomes where men display abhorrent and desperate for sex behavior in pursuit of not elite level looking women.
On multiple occasions, I condemned Ahmed's behavior. However, I also have expressed the notion that Ashley is socially inept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
What body language indicators? If a woman isn't aware of your presence, because you catch sight of her from a distance, or you're standing behind her, how can she indicate anything? Besides, you're a stranger, so why would she indicate anything, until you open your mouth and speak, at which point she has something by which to size you up a bit, and determine whether you're coherent, intelligent, considerate or amusing, etc. Until you actually approach her and speak, she doesn't even know you're interested, vs. being some passer-by, so again--no reason to indicate anything.
For men who approach women, this is a common scenario. It's an issue of spatial relations. As a man, you can find a way to get in a woman's direct line of sight, make eye contact, and smile at her. If she either makes good eye contact and/or smiles back, that is an invitation to approach. If nothing, then's she's often not interested, though since women have gotten poorer at body language signaling in the smartphone era, it is still possible to do an approach. If a woman is absorbed in her smartphone, then there's zero point in doing an approach.
In order for a man to do an approach, he must be in her line of sight. When he is in her line of sight, she can indicate something non-verbally. She could indicate nothing, but at least it is spatially possible to do an approach.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
