Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I tend to believe that women initiate encounters with men with unconscious non-verbal signals. A man who is able to read these signals will have a good success rate in meeting new women. A man who cannot will be pegged as a "creeper".

I think it's not only true in real life, but on dating sites as well. Women receive so many messages from men that you are probably just going to get buried in all the noise if you send one. The best approach would be to make a good profile, and wait for them to message you. I'm not saying males initiating contact on these sites won't have any success, but I'd say it's statistically unlikely, comparatively.

It is also a strange coincidence that even on a biological level millions of sperm must compete to fertilize one egg. In lieu of absolute scientific proof (which may or may not exist) I'm fairly confident women are the ones who do the choosing, not us.

For the best results in approaching women, please consider the following flowcharts:

Pre-Approach Flowchart:

    <eye contact?> --no--> STOP
           |
          yes 
           |
    <did it seem adverse?> --yes--> STOP
           |
           no
           |
    <is boyfriend present?> --yes--> STOP
           |
           no
           |
        APPROACH          
     
Approach Flowchart:

    <Did you open by sexually assaulting
     this woman, such as by unwanted
     touching?> -------------YES---> GO TO JAIL
                    |
    <Did you open with a pick-up line?> --YES--> FAIL
                    |
    <Did you open with a cowardly question
     such as: do you have the time?>    --YES--> FAIL
                    |
    <Did you confidently introduce yourself
     or say something very interesting?> --NO--> FAIL
                    |
                   yes
                    |
    <Was it reciprocated?> --NO--> Nice try anyway
                    |
                   yes
                    |
   +-- <Are you and her still exchanging mutual -- NO
   |    conversation?>                              |
   |                |                               |
   |               YES                              |
   |                |                               |
  NO---<Do you think it is time to end it?>         |
                    |    +--------------------------+
                   YES   |
                    |    |
                    |    |
              <Did you end it?>--NO---[Your odds worsened]
                      |                      |
                     YES                     |
                      |                      |
              <Did you agree to meet --------+
               again or go somewhere
               else together immediately?>--NO--+
                      |                         |
    WIN  ------------YES                        |
                                                |
                      +--------------------------
                      |
               <Did you get her number?>--NO-- Maybe you 
                      |                  will see her again.
                     YES
                      |
                Call soon or she will forget who
                you are. Don't leave a message the
                first time. Don't call more than 
                two times in the first week. If
                very desperate and no luck after two
                you may try calling once more in a week,
                but seriously, move on...



Yeah...the problem with this is that Defcon is not a dating event and women should not have to navigate it as though it were. Eye contact and not having a boyfriend perched on my arm more likely indicate that I'm there because I'm interested in the subject matter of the conference, not that I'm waiting for someone to put the moves on me. Seriously. Grow up.


> Seriously. Grow up.

If you want to influence someone, use an argument; don't rely on minimization or logical fallacies. That isn't the kind of atmosphere we want around here.


They made their point quite well, you realise you only quoted the last 3 words?

Conveying emotional reaction to what is said, is useful as well. Clearly the GP found it offensive. It's not a logical fallacy...

> That isn't the kind of atmosphere we want around here.

What does that mean? You don't like it when people react emotionally to offensive stuff? I'd reckon you'd have a hard time finding somewhere where that doesn't occur... it's called "being human".


"I think it's not only true in real life, but on dating sites as well. Women receive so many messages from men that you are probably just going to get buried in all the noise if you send one. The best approach would be to make a good profile, and wait for them to message you."

I've gone on plenty of dates from online dating sites. Zero of them were a result of a woman messaging me first. I don't think the strategy you're suggesting is a good one.


What kind of creep makes a flowchart about hitting on women? Just kidding, nicely done. ;)


A retired creep who has a permanent girlfriend

;)


You missed one though:

  <Is your name GavanWoolery or mkramlich?>
              |
             YES
              |
     <Please don't breed>


Crap, too late. I have at least three bastard children in the pipeline. ;)


Sir -- Well done.


"Did you open by sexually assaulting this woman, such as by unwanted touching?"

Touching someone on the shoulder is not sexual assault. Let's try to keep things in perspective, please--if simply touching a member of a particular group warrants jail time, that group is an overclass.


Depends on the touch. No one has suggested this warrants jail time. People are saying, and quite reasonably I think, that you should keep your hands to yourself.

Shaking hands = fine.

Tapping shoulder or top outside of arm = less fine, but acceptable in a narrow range of situations.

Placing cupped hand on shoulder of a stranger, with squeezing or stroking, with "friendly banter" = really not okay.


"Placing cupped hand on shoulder of a stranger, with squeezing or stroking, with "friendly banter" = really not okay."

Nope, still not worth jail time. Move away from the person or grab their hand and remove it from your shoulder. I'm sorry, but you do not get to have people arrested for giving you an unwanted shoulder rub. If they persist, then yeah, they're assaulting (and harassing) you. Again, let's have some perspective.


Why do you keep mentioning jail time? Especially when I specifically said that no-one is claiming jail time is warranted.


I think they were getting confused. It was the Flowchart Guy that said it: <Did you open by sexually assaulting this woman, such as by unwanted touching?> -------------YES---> GO TO JAIL


Relax. It's just hyperbole.


Not when a mere accusation has serious repercussions.


Touching someone on the shoulder is not sexual assault.

How about, as described in the original post, licking someone's shoulder tattoo?




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: