Submitted by Hillary:
Jake and I talked online for two weeks before we had decided to meet each other in person. He offered to make me waffles at his apartment, declaring them his specialty. He said that he'd make all kinds of waffles: blueberry waffles, whole wheat, etc. It sounded unusual and I like homemade breakfasts, so I took him up on it.
I arrived at his place early and I knocked on his door. He asked me to wait a minute. I heard the sounds of shuffling and cooking, and assumed that he was setting everything up just right. I was looking forward to it. What a nice guy, to make me waffles.
He opened the door and led me inside. Once I stepped inside the kitchen, he asked me where the waffles were. I didn't understand his question. He again asked me where the waffles were. I told him that he would probably know better than I would, seeing as how he was making us waffles for breakfast.
He said that I had it wrong, that I was the one who had promised to make waffles for him. He even supplied details that we never discussed. "Yeah, you said that you'd made banana waffles once and that you'd make them again, for me. You don't remember?"
I didn't, because he was lying. But he wasn't done. He said that if I didn't have waffles for him, then I could make it up to him right then and there. He pulled down his pants and stood there, bottomless, right in the middle of the kitchen.
Of course, my first choice was to leave, but before I did, I laughed at him. He didn't like that and then he yelled at me to blow him or get out.
"Bye!"
ROFL!
ReplyDeleteWas his real name Bill?
ReplyDeleteAnother follower of Mel. I bet he has "What Women Want" on Blu-Ray to watch everyday.
ReplyDeleteLying and bullshitting must be part of life to some degree, but how do you keep it to the necessary minimum instead of your first resort?Where do we (guys) start to go wrong and end up like the waffle prick?
ReplyDeleteEating breakfast for a first date? Seems like a sexual innuendo
Seven-thirty, you would be utterly shocked by the number of men that bring their cock up in conversation in the first hour of meeting a gal. It's not so much the "I want sexy-sex!" stuff that is off-putting as much as it reeks of silly desperation.
ReplyDeleteA general hint: Waiting until the second date will get you much more of that strange, fellas.
I've been on dates like this one a few times. Even had one show up for the date in just a shirt and flip flops. He stepped out of the car for the whole neighborhood to see and everything.
ReplyDeleteIt has to work at least once in a while or they wouldn't do it right?
@11:01 It's gotta be a numbers game. Or this guy is just starting out and hasn't quite mastered his pitch.
ReplyDeleteCorrect response: "I thought you were making waffles, not cocktail weenies and 2 pieces of caviar."
...zing?
^Nice.
ReplyDeleteBottom line is that if you want to get covered in sticky syrup, you have to at least heat the iron up first.
^ Got that right!
ReplyDeleteThese kinds of guys never make sense to me. Must be that Abby-Normal brain that can make the jump from non-existent waffles to blow jobs without a few stops in between. What a loser!
Fizziks, Nomatophobia and 11:01,
ReplyDeleteI think guys who grow up with sisters have an advantage in understanding women. If, with the onset of puberty a sister's behavior becomes "irrational" (i.e., boys are transformed from being gross and dumb to being interesting and attractive), then guy has some sort of experience.
In the absence of first hand observation of a sister, much of the socialization that takes place leaves guys confused. You are not supposed to make lewd suggestions and make physical contact except when such are welcome. How are you supposed to know when they are welcome?
Add to this confusing message the proliferation of pornography. What is right and wrong is no longer easily fathomable.
A guy who is not good a reading signals or who is shy can have a hard time making a move. Everytime an awkward guy longs and fails, it is more likely that he will keep bungling until some girl steers him and he gains self confidence. Making out with a girl for the first time is probably as powerful as heroin.
Another type of eduction is guy talk, which in my experience seldom has anything to do with tenderness or intimacy. It's all about scoring with that bitch who is playing hard to get. The more a guy likes a girl, the less likely he is to discuss her with his pals.
If the banana waffle dick type guy is very common, as Fizziks reports, is this a modern phenomenon or simply a common version of the male mind?
Seven-thirty,
ReplyDeleteI think this kind of behavior is an offshoot of the women's lib movement. Today's men want to be as free (sexually) as women are. The problem is that it doesn't work the same way for them.
Women are generally the ones who decide if sex is going to happen or not. It's easy for them to be sexually liberated because they've always held the power of sex; all they had to do was stop saying "no". If a woman really wants to get laid, it's not hard for her to make it happen.
Men are all about sexual liberation for both women and themselves. The problem is that they don't hold the power. Whereas women can generally choose who they sleep with, men have to advertise and hope someone takes the bait. This can require a LOT of trial and error (or a LOT of alcohol). There's a lot of "sexually liberated" advertising going on these days, but it's the same old tactic in a new package.
I utterly disagree with almost everything you wrote. If a sister's behavior seems "irrational" because she's starting to like guys, I can't see how that would prove edifying to the person that deems it such. I find it laughable that the implication is that men can't tell pornography from real life yet presumeably can make that distinction for other forms of fictional entertainment. How do you know if you are welcome? Perchance after someone at least *knows who the hell you even are!* Even people with Apserger's can make the distinction between a stranger and someone familiar. IMHO, the "signal reading" issue is a total red herring. "Confusion" over signals is most likely on account of someone persuing a single-minded goal of getting laid with anyone at all, with the recipient of the advances merely being a convenient target to be replaced with the next convenient target if the effort fails. Hard to read "signals" if you don't give a crap about the other person beyond if you can shake the cookies out of the jar.
ReplyDeleteSure, this techinique will on occasion pan out (say a blow job for a ride home, as long time fans will know). So will randomly asking strangers if you can punch them in the face; ask enough, and someone is bound to agree. But it is absurd to paint the matter as so ambiguous that it is difficult to navigate.
Anyone that can claim to speak to modern vs. age-old pheonomenon will be guilty of rank speculation. Suffice to say I've noted this in about 30% of men since puperty. The real culprit is simply a failure to see women as people (which different from respecting them; I'm referring to simply realizing that women may similar to men may have personal likes and dislikes and aren't uniform).
12:52, it's simple supply and demand. Our genitals are in higher demand. That's the "power" to say no.
ReplyDeleteI find it really upsetting that these comments have devolved from cheap blowjob jokes into a thoughtful discussion on psychosocial development. JMG really needs to start moderating this section.
ReplyDelete^
ReplyDeleteI agree. He clearly has nothing else to be doing.
Now, now, children. Isn't it against internet law to have a serious or intelligent debate on ABCOTD? Why don't you all just stop making sense and go back to calling the OP a fat bitch? This sort of dialogue makes us shallow trolls uncomfortably meditative...
ReplyDeleteAs for Fizziks' statement that the real culprit is a failure to see women as people, I completely agree. But then wouldn't you agree that that also ties in with the fact that pornography influences men's perception of woman as object (when said object = slit)?
After all, a recent study has found that men find their (real-life) women less attractive if they have been consuming large amounts of porn.
Link to article is here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/04/08/the_social_costs_of_pornography_105089.html
So it is plausible that the two phenomena are linked, although some might label me a Puritan for even suggesting it. But what do I know? I'm a fat bitch.
@ 1:59
ReplyDeleteThat probably didn't happen as much in the 70s. The problem is that a lot of girls in porn now are gorgeous!
A lot of women in porn were gorgeous in the 70's...but they were natural and weren't all bad carbon copies of the same beach-ball boobs, bleached blonde hair and liposuctioned ass.
ReplyDeleteI agree with 2:39. I'm not exactly a fan of the clothing and grooming habits of the 70's, but I definitely prefer the natural look (which is pretty much relegated to "amateur" porn these days).
ReplyDelete....so, if I follow correctly, the arguement is now that men think that propositioning a woman for a blowjob within fifteen minutes of seeing her for the first time is on account of the unnatural asthetic of porn stars?
ReplyDeleteWhere to even begin on that "logic"? With the fact that the less "realistic" the porn stars appear the less likely they should be confused with us everyday fat bitches? With the fact that the preferred asthetic of the feminine ideal has varied greatly over the the centuries and various cultures and that women's bodies have been altered - sometimes superficially, sometimes permanently and cruelly - so the existence of women modified for sexual objectification is hardly new, 70's be damned?
Oh, I know. I think I'll start by saying that the attempts to show the logic involved are rather silly, since the key problem is a failure to think logically in the first place, by which I mean a failure to ponder basic cause/effect. What men who display this behavior are engaging in is "wishful thinking".
I should say that I really don't feel that this behavior is limited to men. I think we've all known a woman that is always behaving in a sexually provocative manner to anyone and everyone (I speak from my own sad adolescent experience; abusive home made me equate sexuality with adultness and power, the usual story, yadda yadda yadda). While she may end up getting more sex thru the numbers game (good ol' supply and demand) I think we all have seen how unnervingly awkward that can be, too, and how it has led to men avoiding/insulting her. A higher success rate doesn't negate the negativity she encounters.
Jamie: Right, God forbid there be any intelligent discussion. Only lewd jokes are read-worthy material. Thinking is boring and it shouldn't be allowed, right? Please.
ReplyDelete-Baku-chan
^Your Asperger's is showing :D Jamie was joking.
ReplyDelete@3:43 - yay tits!
Fizziks (re: your comment at 3:19pm), that's not MY argument, even if it might have been others'. My somewhat unsophisticated musing is simply that the two phenomena (porn + first-date pants-dropping) might be linked, not necessarily causal. And the common link is objectification - which does apply to any era, any body aesthetic. Whether the pants-dropping or the porn comes first is irrelevant. The point is that it stems from seeing women as caverns to conquer instead of sentient beings to be respected.
ReplyDeleteOf course I would expect a man of average intelligence to realize that the plasticity he's seeing in Juggs or Hot Lixx is not "real life". But let's for a moment pretend that there is a causal connection between porn-watching and pants-dropping, and that the porn comes first.
If you see enough hot women, even artificially rendered (anime!), getting naked and spreading their legs, day after day, would you not come to fantasize that women all secretly want it? That if the hot ones that appear in magazines, implants or no implants, who could have any guy they wanted, could spread themselves with smiles on their faces (their eyes follow you wherever you go!), then the fat bitches, who are relatively ugly and desperate, should be grateful for male attention?
If you live in a dysfunctional world long enough, you start believing that's what the real world is. You saturate your senses with this fantasy until the sensation itself is your reality.
Maybe you start to believe that women could all be closet whores, but just lack the opportunity or the right guy to make them feel the right way. Eventually, wouldn't disdain for women in general follow on the heels of that fantasy? After all, with that train of thought, even on an animal level, it's got to be an inferior being that would allow others to see it in such a vulnerable position with its tender innermost parts exposed, like a member of the pack showing its belly to the alpha male - weak and the object of contempt.
There may be wishful thinking involved on the part of the guy, but the bottom line is: couldn't the wishful thinking be influenced by the progressive objectification of women caused by looking at too much snatch so that eventually, the equation is "women = snatch"? You don't think our sex-obsessed society contributed to this guy's ass-holiness in any way?
Mmmmm...assholes...
There, you see? I'm just as susceptible.
I'm in love with this thread
ReplyDeleteSame here A noni mouse (awesome name by the way), I'm printing it out.
ReplyDeleteWhen "banana waffles" was first mentioned, I saw it coming. The guy's a total loser.
ReplyDeleteokay for the story: wonder if he was thinking of a different chick and got them confused and wasn't lying? either way dropping pants and demanding bj = loser. she did great by laughing and leaving. However, agreeing to breakfast at his place for a first meeting was stupid in the first place. To me when a guy says he will make breakfast i think he wants sex, i have 2 brothers that to in fact think that breakfast = sex which is why thats what i think guys mean. Met my fella online and he said he was a good cook (dinner dishes), i didn't go to his place to find out for sure until after we dated awhile and i was comfortable with him. He is an awesome cook by the way. Always meet in a public place for the fist time.
ReplyDeleteas for the comments i liked the in depth convo that makes you think and the reference to a ride home = bj, laughed :-) i remember the story :-)
Hmm. Porn ain't new. They found porn in Rome, Egypt, and Japan dating back thousands of years. If it ruins men then it's been doing it for a long time.
ReplyDeleteOn the bright side, as least she left him with his pants on the ground and waffle-less.
I think the guy honestly thought it would work or it has before. I blame the purity movement!
ReplyDelete@Shpilkes: I, like many men and women I know, own a lot of porn. It's 2010. The Internet has come and given plentiful, hand-breaking relief to BILLIONS! Gone are the days of masturbating to the Sears Catalog lingerie section! Gone are the days of hoping your older siblings or some teenager you paid would get you some lame magazine to be passed amongst friends like a pubescent porn time-share! Porn, is the biggest entertainment business in the world. Did you know that porn is one of the biggest profits and products that hotels sell? It's easy, it's cheap, it's right to your room. That's why Jack Donaghy is a genius, but that's a different story.
ReplyDeleteMy point is that porn by itself isn't going to make men think that all women are wanting it anytime, anywhere, from anyone.
1.) Granted, the other day I went to the rope swing at the River and 9 beautiful women decided to get mostly undressed and splashed and played. It wasn't sexual, it was playful water nymphing. If porn was confusing my brain then I would have tried to hump them all. Or even the four guys who decided to get naked.
2.) If porn was such a reflection of real life just around the corner, then how come we're watching so much more porn than real intimacy/interaction with another or even cheap sex for that matter?
3.) There's so much porn consumed that if we were completely over-taken by "what it's supposed to be doing to us" then the world would be like the Zombie Apocalypse of Boners.
Now if someone's experience with women or society in general is extremely limited and their reference for the world is through porn and other superficial means, then yes, I think it can color things. For example, when I lived in Greece, people thought, "Well he must know kung fu!" I'm half-Asian. I assumed that they'd do something like philosophize instead of going on strike and bitching every two weeks.
Damn, I'm rambling. We've all been fucked on the first date, one-night stand, random, yadda yadda yadda. Fizziks is right though, those experiences never, or rarely ingratiated ourselves or the other person to us. What happens to a girl who sleeps around or is viewed as easy? The boys make fun, the girls make fun, and she's a dirty secret if you sleep with her, but she becomes an embarrassing commodity. Even if she's not known as easy, if she sleeps with you too soon or seems too eager, then she must be easy right? She'll cheat on you, friend fuck, etc. Right? Or maybe she's damaged goods, she's learned affection that way, self-worth, and even honest gratification with confused self-reflection.
Unfortunately in some areas we can train ourselves and others to simply maintain our own Arrested Development...
....and that is why you never lie to someone about waffles and whip out your dick!
**says the one-armed man***
Goddamn it! I had a great, serious response with a touch of Arrested Development (it relates!) and this is what I get:
ReplyDeleteRequest-URI Too Large
The requested URL /2010/07/banana-waffle.html... is too large to process.
"That's what she said!"
Holy crap! If anyone out there in blogger land runs into the Waffle-Weiner Man, please please PLEASE use the above line to turn him down. It'd be like "TRON Porn 2.0: He Made Me Waffles, I Made Him Hard, the Fizzik Fizziks story, a Lifetime Original Movie".
Hmmm...could I be the Muffler Man? I fight crime against the Waffle-Weiner man? My powers are getting under a lady's under-carriage and...
...
Ok so my first response wasn't so great, but it's 2:41 in the am and I just woke up. Forgive me. Anyway, you get the point!
ReplyDeleteMan, am I glad I tuned in today. Fizziks got one thing right pussy is more valuable than dick in the market place of sexual relations.
ReplyDeleteFor all of the people who claim that the banana waffle seduction was retarded, consider the recent paternity case of Christiano Ronaldo, the soccer star.
The papers reported that he came on to a waitress in broken English:
“Ronni looked the girl in the eye and said extremely directly: ‘Me, you, f*** f***.’
“She was taken aback and just said: ‘What!’ She didn’t actually understand what he meant. She was totally nonplussed
“The window by his table was steamed up, so he drew a love heart on it with his finger. Then he said, ‘Me, you, kiss,’ and the penny dropped.
“That’s typical Ronni – he pretends his English is terrible when it suits him, and he comes straight to the point. It was just yet another one-night stand and Ronnie assumed he would never see her again.”
But after finding out she was pregnant, and convinced Ronaldo was the only possible father, the woman tracked him down through his agent, Jorge Mendes.
end of quote
Presumably the waitress was both super fine and exuded personality when serving the soccer stars. All it took for Ronaldo to score was the knowledge no dating skill is necessary when you're famous, rich and good looking.
Tiger Woods didn't have to try too hard either.
^Anyone that expects the same results as a hunky athelete or a talented artist is as much of a unipygic troglodyte as the person that expects all women to uniformly respond as porn dictates. Thank you, Clurcan13, for so aptly stating that the sheer volume of porn consumption should have us in END TIMES were the wailers worst predicitions true. I remain heartily pro-porn, and you should know you've been my favorite spelunker ;P
ReplyDeleteI can't believe that I missed this rare gem of a conversational thread on the sociosocietal impacts of pornography on men's attempts to mate with women...for WORK. WTF?!
ReplyDeleteI'm so depressed, I think I'm gonna take my clothes off and hope some undergraduate attending summer school slips and falls (repeatedly) into my cavern.
(Sorry to bring the convo down, y'all, but everything intelligent I could have added has already been said. Whompers for me.)
Fizziks, you are only admitting the general principle active in women's decision making, i.e., they will move quickly if the right alpha male pops up. For the average guy it is not going to work, but the world is not divided into average guys and super stars. Thus, there is reason for some shoot to score without laying the ground work of courtship.
ReplyDelete@Fizziks: My dear, don't be so modest about yourself or me. My "baby-turtle-on-a-trash-bag" as I call it doesn't spelunk you, it base jumps into that gorge.
ReplyDeleteVery much like my heart. ;)
@Frank: True, there so some shoot to score that works, it's a numbers game, but the ratio is so out of wack all it does is upset both parties. If it works 1 out of every 100 times then you'd think that when it did work, we'd happily stay with them, but we don't.
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong, people have needs, but there are better ways to get those needs met. A real relationship; fuck buddy, significant other, whatever, is the best way to go and you don't get that by whipping your dick out and offering to stir the coffee so she can give you some kind of caffeinated blow job. Who would want to stay with that person if they did it? Most likely they're super damaged goods. What kind of person are you?
And please don't confuse this with one night stands, a successful one can come about in many different ways, much of it about timing, desperation, carnal needs, or just what the hell?
But those needs won't be met by such an awkward, over-eager, and selfish lover. Might as well masturbate and not have to deal with a coyote morning.