I’d rather people actually said “Do you want to come back to my room for sex?” rather than “Do you want to come back to my room for coffee?” where coffee is a euphemism for sex, because some people will take coffee at face value, which can lead to either uncomfortable situations, including fear of assault, or lead to people missing opportunities because they are bad at reading between the lines.
I’d rather that too, and I’ve had it go wrong in both directions. But the whole point of much of this site is that outcomes are more important than principles. Saying “do you want to come back to my room for sex?” is not going to change society, it’s just going to make you personally come off as a creep.
Saying “do you want to come back to my room for sex?” is not going to change society, it’s just going to make you personally come off as a creep.
I’m not sure its always creepy, not if you’ve already kissed them. Depends on circumstances. Inviting someone in for coffee and then trying to fuck them can be pretty creepy too.
But I agree that I can’t change society, and so I might as well conform to the rules.
It’s almost always creepy in the context of an early relationship: whether you’ve kissed or not, it’s a strong signal of contempt for or unfamiliarity with sexual norms. About the only exceptions I can think of would occur in very sex-positive cultures with very strong norms around explicit verbal negotiation. There aren’t many of those cultures, and even within them you’d usually want some strong indications of interest beforehand.
On the other hand, if you’ve invited someone up for coffee (or just said “do you want to come back to my place?”, which is pretty much the same offer), that’s not license for them to tear your clothes off as soon as the door closes either. Doing that would be creepy, unless you’ve practically been molesting each other on the way over, but normally the script goes more like this: you walk in, there’s maybe some awkward chitchat, you sit down on the bed or couch, they sit down next to you, you start kissing, and things progress naturally from there. If at any point they break script or the progression stalls out… well, then you make coffee.
About the only exceptions I can think of would occur in very sex-positive cultures with very strong norms around explicit verbal negotiation.
I can think of a few examples where I’ve seen directly propositioning someone work, but these examples were among rather promiscuous people, so I think your point stands.
On the other hand, if you’ve invited someone up for coffee (or just said “do you want to come back to my place?”, which is pretty much the same offer)
Actually, I’d interpret this very differently—inviting someone back for coffee is, on the face of it, saying that the reason you are inviting them is for coffee, not sex. Its a false pretext. But “do you want to come back to my place?” gives no pretext and its obviously for sex (assuming you’ve kissed already).
Obviously, I do know that inviting someone for coffee means sex might happen (or at least it does in some contexts). But there’s also people who invite people over to “watch a movie” or “smoke weed” and this is more of a grey area because they might actually want to watch a movie.
Actually, I’d interpret this very differently—inviting someone back for coffee is, on the face of it, saying that the reason you are inviting them is for coffee, not sex. Its a false pretext.
It’s a pretext, sure. That’s the point. The standard getting-to-know-you script does not allow for directly asking someone for sex (unless you’re already screwing them on the regular; “wanna get some ice cream and fuck?” is acceptable, if a little crass, on the tenth date) so we’ve developed the line as a semi-standardized cover story for getting a couple hours of privacy with someone. You shouldn’t read it as “I want coffee”, but rather as “I want to be alone with you, so here’s a transparent excuse”. There are more creative ways to ask the same thing, but because they’re more creative (and therefore further outside the standard cultural script), they’re more prone to misinterpretation.
Compare the Seventies-era cliche of “wanna come look at my etchings?”
I think there’s a deeper point: human interactions are multilayered and the surface layer does not necessarily carry the most important meaning. The meaning can be—and often is—masked by something else which should not be interpreted literally.
“It’s a false pretext” is not even wrong—it’s just not a correct way to think about the situation. A “pretext” is a way to express in a socially acceptable fashion a deliberately ambiguous meaning which, if said explicitly aloud, would change the dynamics of the situation completely.
Human interaction, especially of a sexual nature, just is not reducible to the straightforward exchange of “wanna fuck?” information bits.
I’d rather that too, and I’ve had it go wrong in both directions. But the whole point of much of this site is that outcomes are more important than principles. Saying “do you want to come back to my room for sex?” is not going to change society, it’s just going to make you personally come off as a creep.
I’m not sure its always creepy, not if you’ve already kissed them. Depends on circumstances. Inviting someone in for coffee and then trying to fuck them can be pretty creepy too.
But I agree that I can’t change society, and so I might as well conform to the rules.
It’s almost always creepy in the context of an early relationship: whether you’ve kissed or not, it’s a strong signal of contempt for or unfamiliarity with sexual norms. About the only exceptions I can think of would occur in very sex-positive cultures with very strong norms around explicit verbal negotiation. There aren’t many of those cultures, and even within them you’d usually want some strong indications of interest beforehand.
On the other hand, if you’ve invited someone up for coffee (or just said “do you want to come back to my place?”, which is pretty much the same offer), that’s not license for them to tear your clothes off as soon as the door closes either. Doing that would be creepy, unless you’ve practically been molesting each other on the way over, but normally the script goes more like this: you walk in, there’s maybe some awkward chitchat, you sit down on the bed or couch, they sit down next to you, you start kissing, and things progress naturally from there. If at any point they break script or the progression stalls out… well, then you make coffee.
I can think of a few examples where I’ve seen directly propositioning someone work, but these examples were among rather promiscuous people, so I think your point stands.
Actually, I’d interpret this very differently—inviting someone back for coffee is, on the face of it, saying that the reason you are inviting them is for coffee, not sex. Its a false pretext. But “do you want to come back to my place?” gives no pretext and its obviously for sex (assuming you’ve kissed already).
Obviously, I do know that inviting someone for coffee means sex might happen (or at least it does in some contexts). But there’s also people who invite people over to “watch a movie” or “smoke weed” and this is more of a grey area because they might actually want to watch a movie.
It’s a pretext, sure. That’s the point. The standard getting-to-know-you script does not allow for directly asking someone for sex (unless you’re already screwing them on the regular; “wanna get some ice cream and fuck?” is acceptable, if a little crass, on the tenth date) so we’ve developed the line as a semi-standardized cover story for getting a couple hours of privacy with someone. You shouldn’t read it as “I want coffee”, but rather as “I want to be alone with you, so here’s a transparent excuse”. There are more creative ways to ask the same thing, but because they’re more creative (and therefore further outside the standard cultural script), they’re more prone to misinterpretation.
Compare the Seventies-era cliche of “wanna come look at my etchings?”
I think there’s a deeper point: human interactions are multilayered and the surface layer does not necessarily carry the most important meaning. The meaning can be—and often is—masked by something else which should not be interpreted literally.
“It’s a false pretext” is not even wrong—it’s just not a correct way to think about the situation. A “pretext” is a way to express in a socially acceptable fashion a deliberately ambiguous meaning which, if said explicitly aloud, would change the dynamics of the situation completely.
Human interaction, especially of a sexual nature, just is not reducible to the straightforward exchange of “wanna fuck?” information bits.