this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2025
473 points (97.2% liked)
Greentext
7407 readers
1308 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Guy's a creepo, gal puts people down unnecessarily. Both will unwillingly die alone.
Why is the guy a creep?
What he says boils down to "I was eavesdropping your conversation, and I assume you're desperate. You might as well lower your standards — date someone random you have no connections with, like me." It's bad; not bad enough to deserve that rude reply, but still bad.
A better approach would be to try to pick up a woman who's alone, offer her a drink*, chitchat a bit, and then ask her for a date. With no references to what she said to other people. Creating some connection between him and her, before he asks her out.
*always ask the bar workers to bring it. Don't bring it yourself.
This is stupid and you should feel bad.
That's damn many assumptions
Not really assumptions, but how it sounds like, in the context of a social setting. Or, if you want: that's how people "read" it.
I feel like reading into it would be a better way to put it. Though not sure how different that is from assuming things
A bit of a tangent, but I really hate this. Not meaning to call you out, this is a really common recommendation for an icebreaker and it's also reinforced by popular media and the like, but it always feels to me like the implication is that if a man wants to approach a woman, they must buy something for them as part of that process. Like it's a transaction fee to be given a chance.
i date actively.
most women expect you to pay your way into their company. in my city they had a poll, 80% of women expected a man to pay for a nice (expensive) first date otherwise he wasn't worth dating. only 20% of women disagreed with this.
They also polled the men. The male split was 60/40. The hosts on the show where they did the poll had their mind blown how rabidly sexist the women were and immediately went on about how stupid it was and how men and women should each pay their own way until a relationship is established.
Do you think it's purely just sexism, or do you think it maybe has something to do with the strategy women must employ to protect themselves from being assaulted by strangers?
Is the implication, then, that people with money are never dangerous individuals?
No, not never, but a monetary barrier probably does filter out some bad actors. Not all of course, and it probably filters out some good actors too unfortunately. But with the amount of assaults women are faced with, I understand why they feel the need to be somewhat choosy.
the reason they are choosey is they like rich men and want money.
the worst thing i man can be to a woman is poor. being rich will excuse a lot other factors, including assault. i've literally dated women who admitted they were raped by men but it wasn't so bad because he was rich. more than one, in fact. one of them literally told me about her sexual assault, but then was like 'oh but he had the most comfortable luxurious bedsheets and he said they cost $500'.
least to say i stopped seeing those women immediately after they admitted that. apparently rape isn't so bad if a rich guy is doing it to you. it's only bad if the guy isn't rich.
a lot of women have a completely messed up psychology about money and sex.
how does expecting a guy to buy you a $200 dinner prevent him from assaulting you?
or are you saying if a guy can only buy you a $20 drink, or doesn't buy you a drink, he's dangerous and awful?
because that shit is not only sexist, it's classist. the assumption that wealthy people are morally better people is patently wrong.
It really does ring faintly of a "poor people are dangerous" kind of note.
Nah you're missing the point. The problem is that men assault women disproportionately. That's what needs to be called out as sexism, that's what needs addressed, that's what needs to change.
What about women who assault men, are they cool and we don't need to call them out?
I've been raped, groped, and physically assaulted by women a lot more than I have ever been by men. I've never assaulted a woman, but I've met woman who have physically attacked me for not raping them.
from where i stand it's woman on man violence that really needs to be addressed. because it's normalized and male rape victims are mocked and harassed.
it's almost as if shitty people assaulting people isn't a gendered thing. it's a shitty people thing. maybe it's shitty people who need to be called out, not men or women as a whole.
I agree, but the location was a bar. Kinda normal at a bar.
Yeah, I think the way it was handled in the greentext was way more natural and sincere. No idea why it's considered creepy. Buying some random woman a drink is just cringy.
I get your reasoning, but personally I never interpreted it as a transaction fee. It's more like a token of good will; I do something similar when I find friends in a bar, too.
The main gender problematic I see is:
Sometimes he'd be better off approaching a bear, too, and also won't know it until it's too late. This isn't a gender thing, this is just a "some people are shitty" thing.
amen. god forbid we acknowledge there are shitty people in the world, and their gender is irrelevant to their shittness.
It’s not eavesdropping. They were having a public conversation at a fucking bar - a place where plenty of people go in attempts to meet new people... If it was a private convo (one that can be eavesdropped on) that’s different. If it was a private conversation, they shouldn’t have been at a location where it’s normal to try flirting with strangers.
Paying too much attention on the others' conversations, even in a public environment, is creepy.
If someone is sitting by themselves at a bar, it should be assumed they’re listening to everything around them unless they’re wearing earbuds. Have some general awareness of reality.
people are also loud as fuck. almost anytime i am at a bar i'm forced to listen to people's convos because they are SCREAMING at each other. very few people are talking quietly to each other such that you can't hear them, and if they are doing that, you're not going to hear them.
of course the obnoxious loud people are the very same type who are going to tell you how creepy it is you are listening to them. the only way you can't listen to them is if you had noise cancelling headphones in.
you forgot the part where he sat there for 3 hours alone, nervous and sweating, and periodically staring at the women… then he interrupted a group talking to ask on of them on a date, skipping the part where you introduce yourself and other standard interaction where you gauge someone’s interest before asking….
op was probably also extremely obese, had a neckbeard, a fedora, and hasn’t showered in a month….
then he just stood next to them silently shaking, until they paid attention… then he said his line… mumbling, while staring intently at the girl’s breasts….
i made up a lot but the point is there’s a lot more to it than this fictional story lets on…
Can't think of a time where I've ever seen a woman at a bar alone.
I've seen it plenty, plenty times. Because I was looking for it. That was my "plan A" strategy when I still bothered dating; it works great as long as you know to be assertive without being pushy. (Some people want to be left alone, some only want to chitchat, both things are fine and you should respect that.)
My "plan B" was relying on connections, but that relies on luck. For example:
Then you have some room to at least know B and/or C better. And potentially ask one of them out.
Odds are my "plan B" is not viable for Anon, though - does he even have friends to go to the bar with?
Must be different bars. I see groups of women out but can't recall any individuals. Plan b has pretty much been my entire strategy my whole life. Just being in places with women and being nice, funny, and non-threatening got me in with a bunch of different groups. Not always a date but they would vouch for me.
Nah its not creepy. Its perfectly fine to ask her out like that she just didnt want it and rejected him in a bit of an over the top way. Whole thing is no issue. If you are gonna randomly strike up conversations you will get cooked sometimes.
"I've been listening to your conversation" is not a good way to start. There are some exceptions, but even then you're starting on thin ice and have to ease into it.
I couldn’t help but overhear you and your loud as fuck, half-drunk friends….
"I couldn't help but hear your drunken rantings."
You shouldnt have to rehearse the perfect line that is impossible to be offended by just to talk to a stranger. We aren't robots. We dont always hit 100% of the time. We stumble and overextend. Expectations have gotten out of hand.
you are allowed to stumble on the first line. and it may come off poorly. and if it does the other person is perfectly valid for not wanting to engage further. therefore if you want the other person to continue to engage, you should try not to come off poorly. this isn't some newfangled social phenomenon, it's how basic human interaction has worked for millennia
Asking her out would be fine; the problem, as I already explained, is how. However I do agree with you that her answer was over the top, a simple "No." would be the best.
It was clearly an issue to the Anon, check the last paragraph.
He wasn't just striking up a conversation.
Additionally (and that's neither side's fault), mob mentality is a plague. She was in a group of four people; people typically behave worse in groups than alone.
As opposed to all of the [dating people you have connections with] that happens all the time these days?
If you're trying to say something like "you have connections, unlike all of the dating people": that is not what I said. Everybody has at least some connections; it's all about how you use them to know more people.
If you mean something else, please explain - I'm genuinely struggling to parse your sentence.
That's fair it's a confusing sentence. My point is that in the modern era more people date people they don't know on tingerbee vs people they know, so not having a connection isn't disqualifying.
I added brackets to make the noun clearer.
You don't go up to someone and say hey I was listening to you complain about wanting a guy, how about me? and expect a good response.
"hey, I was just reading you complain about someone, fancy going out on a lemmydate* sometime??"
*I don't actually want to think what a Lemmy date would entail
A nice chat about the merits of Arch Linux and a long kneesock showcase.
sorry m8 u aren't the one for me 😭
I'm a Lubuntu normie soz
Because he spoke to a stranger that didn’t want him to speak to them.
Don't be disingenuous. That is not even remotely close to what I said.
Not bothering further with you.
I guess this means the date's off and you're going to die alone?
I don’t know what you said. My response was general.