quick question...first, the situation...strangers next to each other on a plane. get to talking, hit it off. one party never mentions a significant other, leading the other party to assume that when they both get back to the city in which they live (but had not previously met) that there might be something happening, this due to a lack of any evidence (rings, the word "boyfriend" or "girlfriend" used in conversation).
is the attached person obligated to somehow weave into the conversation the word "boyfriend" or "girlfriend"?
i say yes, if only to clarify things in case there's a possibility of misunderstanding. there's nothing wrong with flirting, and there's nothing ostensibly wrong with flirting when both parties know the deal and neither plans on taking it beyong the flirting. but if there is, to borrow an economics term, an asymetry of information at work, then it's not really fair.
and yes, something like this happened on the plane to the wedding. not that it was a big deal, as the person in question is pretty cool, would make a fun friend and probably knows some cool single women. getting to know people when you're new to an area is fine regardless of the outcome. still...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
you know i don't read these things, but:
...sadly, no one is responsible for self reporting this info. at all. much to everyone's dismay.
my idea of acting like animals--dropping down and 'presenting' like a baboon in heat--hasn't garnered much support, either. But I think it has potential.
It's *so* easy to slip in a reference to a boyfriend or girlfriend ["My boyfriend really loves this book/band/song/etc..." Even if he/she really doesn't] So, while a person is not necessarily obligated to do so, I don't know why they wouldn't.
Interestingly enough this exact issue, from the opposite perspective, was brought up here:
http://home.earthlink.net/~dpizarro/2005.07.01_arch.html#1121390822925
--Susan
Post a Comment