Cruises, Oinks, woofs, taps, etc

[ErosWired]

2 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

I look at these things - growls, woofs, grrs, oinks, taps, whatever the site has - as the old-school bar equivalent of catching someone's eye across the room and nodding, or otherwise acknowledging that something about him caught your eye.

Here’s my take on that. The tap is a communication of a type that, if responded to, runs a significant risk of being interpreted as reciprocal interest or attraction. Yet we are socially conditioned to respond reciprocally to such signals, and failure to do so can seem insensitive, callous, or rude.

So my problem with taps is that they are inconsiderate - they essentially put the recipient in a position where he is forced to take the risk of an unwanted and potentially awkward social interaction, or be considered rude.

Moreover, the tap may simply have been sent nearly reflexively, on a whim, at the literal tap of an icon, and may actually mean nothing more to the sender than the equivalent of a swipe on Tinder. But to the recipient, the tap is always personal and directed, regardless of the original intent.

The notion of this is borne out, to my mind, by the frequency of non-response I get to replies to taps. So the guy winks at you from across the bar, you try to engage back, and he acts as if you’re invisible. Fuck his winking, then, and his tapping too.

[SpectreAgent]

1 hour ago, ErosWired said:

Here’s my take on that. The tap is a communication of a type that, if responded to, runs a significant risk of being interpreted as reciprocal interest or attraction. Yet we are socially conditioned to respond reciprocally to such signals, and failure to do so can seem insensitive, callous, or rude.

So my problem with taps is that they are inconsiderate - they essentially put the recipient in a position where he is forced to take the risk of an unwanted and potentially awkward social interaction, or be considered rude.

Moreover, the tap may simply have been sent nearly reflexively, on a whim, at the literal tap of an icon, and may actually mean nothing more to the sender than the equivalent of a swipe on Tinder. But to the recipient, the tap is always personal and directed, regardless of the original intent.

The notion of this is borne out, to my mind, by the frequency of non-response I get to replies to taps. So the guy winks at you from across the bar, you try to engage back, and he acts as if you’re invisible. Fuck his winking, then, and his tapping too.

That’s an awful lot of angst over a wee little tap. I’m not sure I agree that one is obligated to respond to an unsolicited communication online. If it troubles you so much, why not state clearly that you do not reply to taps and stick to it? I wouldn’t because to do so might, just might, mean missing out on the greatest shag of my life. For example, just a couple of weeks before the first lockdown I got a tap from a faceless profile at 2am. As it was very close, I replied. Within the hour, I was having an incredible session with a lovely black and white couple, both good looking tops (let’s just say I was late into work that day). Had I been precious and ignored their tap I would not have had that. I can’t speak for others, but I’m certainly not going pass up opportunities like that because of some daft “no taps” rule.

[ErosWired]

5 minutes ago, RawPlug said:

That’s an awful lot of angst over a wee little tap. I’m not sure I agree that one is obligated to respond to an unsolicited communication online. If it troubles you so much, why not state clearly that you do not reply to taps and stick to it? I wouldn’t because to do so might, just might, mean missing out on the greatest shag of my life. For example, just a couple of weeks before the first lockdown I got a tap from a faceless profile at 2am. As it was very close, I replied. Within the hour, I was having an incredible session with a lovely black and white couple, both good looking tops (let’s just say I was late into work that day). Had I been precious and ignored their tap I would not have had that. I can’t speak for others, but I’m certainly not going pass up opportunities like that because of some daft “no taps” rule.

I’m not being ‘precious’, I’m taking the compilation of my experience over the course of years of dealing with people who do this, and making a determination about how much bullshit I’m prepared to put up with. You’ve had good luck with taps? Good for you. I uniformly haven’t, and I started out as a guy who always replied to them. It’s not ‘daft’, and it’s not anxious, it’s a practical decision based on the way people have behaved toward me when I’ve attempted to respond to them. If you’re willing to put up with that level of fuckery in your quest for the perfect shag, then more power to you; It’s sure as hell not worth it to me.

[SpectreAgent]

3 hours ago, ErosWired said:

I’m not being ‘precious’, I’m taking the compilation of my experience over the course of years of dealing with people who do this, and making a determination about how much bullshit I’m prepared to put up with. You’ve had good luck with taps? Good for you. I uniformly haven’t, and I started out as a guy who always replied to them. It’s not ‘daft’, and it’s not anxious, it’s a practical decision based on the way people have behaved toward me when I’ve attempted to respond to them. If you’re willing to put up with that level of fuckery in your quest for the perfect shag, then more power to you; It’s sure as hell not worth it to me.

Perhaps, then, the fundamental difference between us is that I’ve always adhered to the adage that it is better to travel hopefully than it is to arrive.

So someone taps me, I respond and nothing comes back. What have I lost? Nothing. But if I’m tapped and don’t respond, I might - possibly not in your experience - just might have missed out on something good. I’m naturally laid back and optimistic and thus regard apps for what they are - a meaningless distraction for an hour or two, with no expectations on my part. If I get good sex on them (which I have), great. If not, I’ll grab a coffee or a whisky and watch some TV. To take them any more seriously than than, still less be annoyed by them, seems somewhat pointless to my mind.

[SpectreAgent]

12 hours ago, Mcv69 said:

Some men may be shy to initiate conversation, not everyone is confident just to say hi or state there intentions straight of the bat. Personally I don’t mind them and think they are a decent tool to have as a ice breaker. 

It’s the same with the bias against faceless profiles. There may be 1001 reasons why someone can’t or won’t post a profile picture for the world to see. In some countries, it could be positively dangerous for him to do so. It’s not for me to judge anyone for it. 

Edited July 25, 2022 by RawPlug

[BootmanLA]

10 hours ago, ErosWired said:

Here’s my take on that. The tap is a communication of a type that, if responded to, runs a significant risk of being interpreted as reciprocal interest or attraction. Yet we are socially conditioned to respond reciprocally to such signals, and failure to do so can seem insensitive, callous, or rude.

Everything has risks. You pays you money and you takes you chances.

10 hours ago, ErosWired said:

So my problem with taps is that they are inconsiderate - they essentially put the recipient in a position where he is forced to take the risk of an unwanted and potentially awkward social interaction, or be considered rude.

So does holding the elevator door for someone coming towards it. So does holding a door for someone approaching it with a package in her arms. It's called living in society, and we do these little things to acknowledge one another's existence and value.

10 hours ago, ErosWired said:

Moreover, the tap may simply have been sent nearly reflexively, on a whim, at the literal tap of an icon, and may actually mean nothing more to the sender than the equivalent of a swipe on Tinder. But to the recipient, the tap is always personal and directed, regardless of the original intent.

Maybe to YOU it's always that way. Assuming the entire world views things the same way as you do is just a little bit self-important.

10 hours ago, ErosWired said:

The notion of this is borne out, to my mind, by the frequency of non-response I get to replies to taps. So the guy winks at you from across the bar, you try to engage back, and he acts as if you’re invisible. Fuck his winking, then, and his tapping too.

Sometimes a compliment is just a compliment and the person's not interested in more than acknowledging that he finds something about you appealing - even if he has no intent on acting on that appeal. Again, your insistence that it must lead to a suitable transaction or it's an offense against humanity is just... something.

I mean, I do get it. You've mentioned before that you're somewhere on the autism spectrum, and that you have a difficult time reading people's signals. That's fair. But neurotypical people (for lack of a better term) do use signals - which we have to evaluate and place in context, and sometimes misstep, but that's life - as a means of navigating social spaces. As I noted, just post in your profile that you don't respond to them, and then you're free to ignore them without worrying that you seem rude - BECAUSE YOU INFORMED PEOPLE, and if they're too stupid to read your profile before tapping/oinking/whatever, that's on them.

Complaining that because YOU don't/can't/won't use these things makes them horrible and useless and something that should be abolished is, well, again, something.

[BootmanLA]

8 hours ago, ErosWired said:

it’s a practical decision based on the way people have behaved toward me when I’ve attempted to respond to them.

Because you responded with expectations.

Here's the thing: you don't know what the person "means" when he taps/oinks/woofs. You just know he's noticed you. Just like in the bar, where it may be "man, that guy is hot" or "man, does that guy know his fly is open?", noticing and acknowledging the notice is just a first step.

That's why I respond in a way that acknowledges, but does not impose an expectation of a further reply. If there is one, great. If not, I've done my part, and I move on. 

[BootmanLA]

4 hours ago, RawPlug said:

It’s the same with the bias against faceless profiles. There may be 1001 reasons why someone can’t or won’t post a profile picture for the world to see. In some countries, it could be positively dangerous for him to do so. It’s not for me to judge anyone for it. 

There may be 1001 reasons, but not all are valid enough, when dealing with *me*, to justify that.

Living in a country where there is danger in doing so is certainly a valid reason. On the other hand, what possible reason could someone living in such a place have for contacting me, in the southern United States? I'm not looking for cyber sex with someone whose first language isn't English, I'm not looking to sponsor someone for immigration purposes, and if it's not safe for him to be open there, I'm sure as fuck not going to travel to that country.

Most other reasons - and they all boil down to either "there are people that I'm not out to and don't want to be discovered" or "I have low enough self esteem that I don't think you'll talk with me if you see my face" - can be dealt with by sending a photo with the message (assuming the site allows that, and most do).

About the only time I'll consider one of those reasons "valid" enough to continue conversing with the person is if he indicates, first up, that he's interested in talking about something specific and not having to do with finding me physically appealing in some way - such as, he noticed I listed X as a hobby and he shares that hobby. I'm not worrying about what such a person looks like - my friends run the gamut of conventionally plain to ohmygodhesgorgeous, and I am much closer to the "plain" end of that spectrum myself. Otherwise, yeah, I'm pretty much on team "No pic, no chat". 

[ErosWired]

20 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

Everything has risks. You pays you money and you takes you chances.

So does holding the elevator door for someone coming towards it. So does holding a door for someone approaching it with a package in her arms. It's called living in society, and we do these little things to acknowledge one another's existence and value.

Maybe to YOU it's always that way. Assuming the entire world views things the same way as you do is just a little bit self-important.

Sometimes a compliment is just a compliment and the person's not interested in more than acknowledging that he finds something about you appealing - even if he has no intent on acting on that appeal. Again, your insistence that it must lead to a suitable transaction or it's an offense against humanity is just... something.

I mean, I do get it. You've mentioned before that you're somewhere on the autism spectrum, and that you have a difficult time reading people's signals. That's fair. But neurotypical people (for lack of a better term) do use signals - which we have to evaluate and place in context, and sometimes misstep, but that's life - as a means of navigating social spaces. As I noted, just post in your profile that you don't respond to them, and then you're free to ignore them without worrying that you seem rude - BECAUSE YOU INFORMED PEOPLE, and if they're too stupid to read your profile before tapping/oinking/whatever, that's on them.

Complaining that because YOU don't/can't/won't use these things makes them horrible and useless and something that should be abolished is, well, again, something.

Offense against humanity? Something that should be abolished? Hyperbole much? Don’t inflate my language into things I didn’t say. I said that was my take on it, not a declaration of universal truth. Why you, and others responding to my views in this thread, have felt the need to adopt such a defensive posture is a little puzzling considering I’m just relating my experience. And your condescension in schooling me on what it means to live in a Neurotypical society, with its arbitrary, capricious social rules and its breathtaking self-absorption, is noted. Do not presume that simply because you have been informed of my Autism that you “get it”. I assure you, you absolutely don’t.

[SpectreAgent]

46 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

There may be 1001 reasons, but not all are valid enough, when dealing with *me*, to justify that.

Living in a country where there is danger in doing so is certainly a valid reason. On the other hand, what possible reason could someone living in such a place have for contacting me, in the southern United States? I'm not looking for cyber sex with someone whose first language isn't English, I'm not looking to sponsor someone for immigration purposes, and if it's not safe for him to be open there, I'm sure as fuck not going to travel to that country.

Most other reasons - and they all boil down to either "there are people that I'm not out to and don't want to be discovered" or "I have low enough self esteem that I don't think you'll talk with me if you see my face" - can be dealt with by sending a photo with the message (assuming the site allows that, and most do).

About the only time I'll consider one of those reasons "valid" enough to continue conversing with the person is if he indicates, first up, that he's interested in talking about something specific and not having to do with finding me physically appealing in some way - such as, he noticed I listed X as a hobby and he shares that hobby. I'm not worrying about what such a person looks like - my friends run the gamut of conventionally plain to ohmygodhesgorgeous, and I am much closer to the "plain" end of that spectrum myself. Otherwise, yeah, I'm pretty much on team "No pic, no chat". 

I agree with much of that. As someone who never came out because, essentially, I was never in, I’ve never had a problem showing my face on Grindr or Scruff. However, I note not many guys have a clear face picture on here, myself included. Is that because it’s not a hook-up site or because of the nature of the site? Probably both. I’m not making any judgements about that, by the way.  I respect it. However, as a general rule of thumb I do understand the “No pic, no chat” rule, even if I’ve been pleasantly surprised on occasions I’ve broken it.

Edited July 25, 2022 by RawPlug

[BootmanLA]

1 hour ago, RawPlug said:

However, I note not many guys have a clear face picture on here, myself included. Is that because it’s not a hook-up site or because of the nature of the site? Probably both. 

I figure "both" as well. I'm happy to share a face pic here with anyone for whom there's a reason, but since I treat this as a discussion spot, not a hookup/dating/whatever spot, I consider faces less necessary.

[BootmanLA]

1 hour ago, ErosWired said:

Offense against humanity? Something that should be abolished? Hyperbole much? Don’t inflate my language into things I didn’t say. I said that was my take on it, not a declaration of universal truth. Why you, and others responding to my views in this thread, have felt the need to adopt such a defensive posture is a little puzzling considering I’m just relating my experience. And your condescension in schooling me on what it means to live in a Neurotypical society, with its arbitrary, capricious social rules and its breathtaking self-absorption, is noted. Do not presume that simply because you have been informed of my Autism that you “get it”. I assure you, you absolutely don’t.

I fully acknowledge I don't "get" autism the same way I don't "get" what it's like to be Black in the U.S. I can understand some aspects of both objectively, I can observe from the outside to a certain degree, but "get"? No, I don't pretend to.

But that also means you don't "get" what it's like to be neurotypical, either - only that you see aspects of it going on around you and it's outside your ability to experience as we do (that's my limited understanding of it). And you drive that home by describing what they are *based on how they feel to you* without qualifying that this isn't some universally agreed upon convention - and in fact, obviously, a lot of people find these things useful or the software apps wouldn't have them in place.

[ErosWired]

13 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

but "get"? No, I don't pretend to.

 

3 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

I mean, I do get it.

🤨

[onlyraw]

Well if anything this conversation has shown the problems with using one of the cruises, oinks etc is that there is clearly no universal definition of what these mean and what the “polite” (or interested) way to respond is

I myself get confused as to what some of them mean - I assume that if I get cruised on recon by a guy more than 100 miles away that the guy just likes something in my profile - and if I am in the mood I might strike up a conversation with him about whatever  - but knowing that he is not planning on hoping on a plane and coming out to submit to me

(or he is trying to be one of the “most cruised” and he is cruising anyone and everyone in hopes that enough people cruise him back to move him up the ladder) 

but now I am digressing (sorry)

So my take on all of this is that if you are really interested in a guy - find the courage to at least say “hi” 

Or better yet - “hi I like (fill in the blank) about your … (fill in the blank)”

or if you just are mildly interested Or want to leave it more to fate - just send a tap 

(while I really miss the bars and cruising in person- “one” good thing about being online is at least you know he is winking at you and not the guy standing behind you….😉)

 

[BootmanLA]

10 hours ago, ErosWired said:

🤨

Maybe if you read the posts in question more closely you'll see I was talking about two different things. (Or maybe you don't care, you're just looking to try to make me look hypocritical. I can't know which it is because I can't get inside your brain.)

The earlier "I get it" post refers, rather clearly, to the fact that I get you are neurodivergent and that you perceive and interact with people differently because of that difference. I don't have to "get," on a visceral level, exactly HOW it's different, to recognize THAT it's different.

Just like I don't have to "get" what it's like to be a black man in America to know that his experience and mine are, in many respects, radically different.

In fact, I can even identify many of those respects in which many such men and I are different - the need for behaving in certain ways when dealing with law enforcement, for instance, even knowing that behaving exactly as recommended is no guarantee of fair treatment; what I can't "get" is how that feels, what it's like to live like that. I can guess, I can imagine, but I can't KNOW.

Likewise: I can identify some of the respects in which many neurodivergent people and I are different - in part because of the work they, and their advocates in the health community, have done to educate us. I can't "get" how it feels to be neurodivergent, nor do I pretend to. I do fairly confident that when such a person tells me "I am unable to pick up on X type of signal from others", I can make that statement with respect to his circumstances and not be pulling shit out of my ass. I may not understand how that affects him, but I can recognize that it DOES affect him.