The problem with dating is that not everyone you like is going to like you back. And you’re not going to like everyone who likes you.
Online dating exacerbates this because instead of being forced by social convention to interact, like we usually are in real life, online the code of conduct is different.
I have absolutely no qualms about ignoring a guy who virtually catcalls me, the same way I have no qualms about ignoring a guy who catcalls me in the street. But a more benign, though not necessarily more enticing message, such as “Hey, what’s up?” while ignorable online, warrants a response in person.
If I guy walked up to me in a bar and said, “Hey, what’s up?” I’d have to say something. Even “Thanks, I’m not interested,” would be fine, but if I just ignored him while talking to my friend, or worse, sitting alone staring into my drink, that would be incredibly rude, not to mention a bit weird.
So why is social convention different when we’re wooing—or being wooed—online?
Well for one, hitting on people from the safety of your own home—rather than physically making a move—is less scary and less risky. Because of this, more people hit on more people, and because of this, more people hit on more people who aren’t interested in them.
This results in many more unsolicited and unrequited advances than would be made if we were all hitting on each other in person, which in turn increases the number of times these advances need to be rejected.
All this raises the issue of rejection etiquette. The old “Sorry, we were just leaving,” doesn’t work as well online.
It came up in a debate I had a few days ago, further cementing my nascent thoughts about writing this column. My opponent, so to speak, steadfastly believed that not answering was just plain rude, to the point where he would invent non-existent deal breakers—like, “Oh you seem great, but I’m a vegan and you’re just a vegetarian which could clearly never work out, sorry, bye”—to let the person down easy. I say “non-existent” because if there actually were a real deal breaker, this would be fine. I certainly have deal brekaers. But he would make them up to save himself from having to say he wasn’t attracted to the girl.
I advocated for not answering, which personally, is what I would prefer if someone weren’t interested in me. I’m not going to be everybody’s type, and I’m fine with that, just like I know there are plenty of great guys are just not my type.
I make a rare exception for guys who obviously put an extraordinary amount of thought into their messages to me and clearly thought the connection was going to be mutual. In these cases, I really do appreciate the messages—most of which are quite good and insightful—but the fact is that I’m not attracted to them and it’s not going to happen. Yet I’m afraid that ignoring them will make them think the message wasn’t good enough, and I don’t want them to believe that. So this is when I concede myself a little white lie.
I tell the guys, thanks, I loved their message, but I just started seeing someone and I’m not meeting new people while I wait to see where this is going, but good luck.
I just want to make sure they know their message was received and appreciated and they should keep trying. But, these cases are really one in a hundred, and so most of the time I just don’t answer.
He wasn’t satisfied with my answer and the debate went on until we finally agreed to disagree. Which is when I decided to take to the polls.
I think this is an issue that a lot of people wrestle with, so in addition to my perspective (and the perspective of my worthy debate opponent) I thought I’d give you the perspective of your peers.
I asked
“If you send a message to someone and it turns out they aren’t interested—for whatever reason—would you rather they just ignore the message and not answer you, or would you rather they sent you a ‘thanks but no thanks’ message?
Conversely, what do you do when someone messages you and you aren’t interested? Do you respond and tell them you aren’t interested, or do you just not answer?”
If you’d like to participate in this poll, please visit our facebook page!
They answered
“One of the things that makes me uneasy about OKC, especially in a huge place like NYC, is that it encourages the commodification of people. It’s easy to find people who seem ‘better’ than someone else whom you’ve met or chatted with.
That being said, I think it’s cleaner and easier if a woman just doesn’t respond to me. I don’t take it personally, and it avoids me being tempted to win their attention again by responding to their response. Like you wrote in your most recent column, if a woman doesn’t want to have naked time with you, it isn’t going to happen. That’s only human.
So, that’s also how I react to women I’m not interested in. It took me a while to stop feeling like it was rude to not politely decline their attention, but I also think that being told ‘no’ can sting more than the implied same through silence.” - Male, 27
“So I might have bad manners but I just ignore people I’m not interested in and I prefer if they ignore me. If don’t really know the person it seems kind of too much to tell them they are not your type and people usually get the message if you don’t respond.” – Female, 27
“At least in New York, the number of women online doesn’t feel limited. Consequently, I view the site as one of the few mutually-beneficial ‘buyers market,’ in which potential comparability can be recognized before messaging someone. Thus, I send out a direct and personal message only when I’m confident in a prospective connection, and I anticipate this is responsible for a high response rate. However, among those ‘not interested,’ a ‘non reply’ is much more common than someone replying to my message with a clear ‘I’m not interested.’
I can see the awkwardness of a stranger sending a personal message and seeing a strong compatibility in you when the feeling immediately isn’t mutual, so I don’t hold it against anyone who never replies. The relationships on OkC are real, but talk is still cheap.
My typical response abides by that same philosophy, so I typically won’t write back unless it’s a long message and the person has obviously spent time reading about me and takes the time to pay a nice compliment, in which case I’ll say thanks but give the impression I’m not interested in communicating further.
Besides, there’s also a perceived advantage to not needlessly following up every short message or connection that’s not going anywhere, as perhaps that ‘I reply regularly’ icon would instead display an ‘I reply selectively.’” – Male, 22
“I’m not really sure to be honest. I’m not too good with this… I think its probably best to say nothing. However if there is some correspondence, it’s nicer to tell someone that you’re not going to be returning their messages.
So, if we were to continue to talk for a week, and then you or I just stopped, I don’t think that’s nice. But it’s ok not to respond.” - Male, 31
“If a girl doesn’t answer me, it does not bother me. And I guess I’d just rather have them ignore me than give me some stupid excuse.” - Male, 24
“I never respond to guys I’m not interested in. What am I supposed to say, ‘Hey, nice message but I think you’re ugly?’ That’s just rude. But I think I would rather receive a thanks but no thanks message. It’s hard to believe when I put a lot of thought into sending a guy a message and he doesn’t respond.” - Female, 26
“If a girl contacts me and I’m not interested, I write them back, to me, that is simply common courtesy. It’s like if someone approached you at a bar or social event you just don’t roll your eyes and walk away. At least not me, I tend to give people credit for at least making an effort.
Anyways women are hit on more than men, and are typically more sensitive to the approach. Whereas a most men have less of a shield when it comes to meeting new people. Just my opinion, hope it helps.” – Male (don’t remember his age)
“I would rather that they ignore the message as I do the same. To me it’s less like rejection, or seems to hurt less, if it hurts at all.” - Female, 27
“1. It would be nice to hear” thanks, but no thanks,” but by no means required. I think looking back at your profile and not responding within a day or two conveys the same thing. Bigger issue is that you then want to block them so they don’t come up in your search but you just don’t because you hope they may still respond. Optimism has its drawbacks I guess.
2. I usually don’t respond if the message is lame. If someone shares something or says something that gets my attention (i.e. mentions a good band or song), I may respectively respond, but I try to keep it clear enough that they [hopefully] get the “thanks, but no thanks” message.” - Male, 36
“It depends on how interested I am in the guy. I would prefer a guy say thanks but no thanks, especially if I am very interestedin him. The majority of the time I do not respond. However, I will respond if a guy seems nice but I’m not attracted to him physically.” - Female, 26
“Ahh, good question. I don’t respond at all, and I prefer for others to do the same. A response would trick you into thinking that it’s a bigger deal- that this is more than just some person who you don’t know at all.” - Male, 27
“1) I would rather they ignore it. I can delude myself into thinking they’re too busy to answer, rather than not find me attractive. 2) I basically just don’t answer if I’m really uninterested. If I’m on the fence, I’ll give them a chance and respond kind of half-heartedly, to see what they do next.” – Female, 27
***
What do you send? And what would you rather receive?
Tell me in the comments!
***
Have Questions? Comments? Suggestions? Need Advice?
Have a funny/saucy/risqué dating or sex story you’d like to see in print but are too afraid to publish yourself?
Email me!
OliviaQuiver@gmail.com
Or follow me on Twitter!
@OliviaQuiver