Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ncsu.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!mcnc!ncsu!rdr From: rdr@ncsu.UUCP (druid) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: costless first dates Message-ID: <2650@ncsu.UUCP> Date: Tue, 17-Jul-84 15:45:51 EDT Article-I.D.: ncsu.2650 Posted: Tue Jul 17 15:45:51 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 18-Jul-84 06:51:37 EDT Organization: N.C. State University, Raleigh Lines: 30 <> > I'm married, but if I was back in the market again one principle to > which I would strongly adhere would be to make the first and second date > a mutually pleasing- costless outing; playing tennis, bicycling or going > to the zoo,etc. A chance to feel each other out with nothing but some > time invested for both parties. >>This sounds suspiciously like 'I'm not going to spend money on you until I >>see a return on my investment'. Prostitutes guarantee their work with many >>fewer complications. On the contrary, I think that it is a very sound idea to do things on a first date that are low cost, and allow both people to simply spend time with each other and get to know one another. The idea is to become friends and allow yourself to become closer to the other person (if it will happen), rather than play money and time games with expectations of what will happen or what he/she expects (i hope that made sense). Look at it this way chuq: perhaps he just wants to know that the investment isn't all that she wants (ie: that she is interested in him as person, first). I don't mean to imply that this is the *only* way to do things, but there is certainly nothing wrong with the principle. Trish, it sounds to me like you're just angrier, not happier. If you are going to make broad sweeping statements and then not bother to clarify yourself, then you have no cause for jumping on alan (or anyone else), for misinterpreting what you said. have fun all... dave hesselberth the Druid of NC decvax!mcnc!ncsu!rdr (put my name in Subject line if you mail me; not my account)