Lyre

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 41 points 3 months ago (16 children)

In her book "How to talk to anyone" Leil Lowndes suggests that when speaking with women it's best to maintain constant, unbroken eye contact to signal attention and interest. She goes on to note that even when engaged in conversation with multiple people one should act as if their eyes are constantly glued to the woman, only briefly looking away when another person is speaking and behaving as if your eyes are irresistibly drawn back to the woman of interest. She believes this formula is best in male to female conversations and female to female conversation.

By contrast, she notes that when engaged in a male to male conversation, one should regularly break eyecontact as not to be perceived as a threat. However, one should still act as if your eyes are being irresistibly drawn back to theirs.

.... I have no idea what Lowndes's qualifications are and frankly this sounds like a formula written by an alien trying to understand humans but hey maybe theres some merrit to it idk

[–] [email protected] 103 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)
  • Orcas are hyper intelligent
  • There has never been a documented orca attack on humans
  • People regularly go missing at sea without a trace

Hmmm....

[–] [email protected] 25 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I mean at this point it's not even news

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

Good catch, I'll correct it 👍

[–] [email protected] 43 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (16 children)

I feel like i see a joke or comic like this every two months.

Here's the thing, if you are unsure about the messages you're receiving and decided not to act, you did the correct thing. You were wise not to interpret uncertain signals as signs of romantic interest, no matter how clear they were in hindsight. If a woman is interested in you, the onus is on her to make that unambiguous and take the next step, because she's not the one who's advances could be mistaken as dangerous.

You did the right thing.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 months ago

Huh, the commenter mentioned it really casually but its a fun fact that Peter is actually just a nickname for the apostle Simon that does essentially mean Rocky or Rocko. The original name Petros just means rock like in the word petrified.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Hey listen I'm not trying to read too far into this or anything but if op's source is actually accurate then doesn't that pretty well refute what you're saying?

[–] [email protected] 44 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Ya, and then he spent pretty much the rest of his life trying to destroy her reputation and disparage women in general. Pope was one of history's first notable incels.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 months ago

"sometimes it's wildly wrong and they don't question where it comes from"

A stark difference from google results surely

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Ok, but they should logically be afraid of causing it. The only reason not to be afraid of the end of the world is if you're going to the good afterlife.

view more: ‹ prev next ›