TER General Board

Hey, leave.....
AnOfficerandaGentlemen 4077 reads
posted
1 / 48

Everyone agrees that stalkers are bad and should be deterred.  Everyone agrees that safety is important.  Everyone, however, won't agree with this post.  But hopefully this post will elevate the discussion.  Wishful thinking?At any rate ...    

I suspect that many providers unintentionally create self-fulfilling prophecies with potential clients.  

For example, if a woman thinks that her husband will leave her for another woman, she will act in ways that will directly or indirectly cause her belief to come true. She might get jealous easily and make a fuss about him being friends with other women. She might pick fights whenever she suspects that he is cheating on her, or she might go through his personal things to look for evidence of cheating. Eventually, her actions will put a strain on their marriage, and her husband just might leave her, causing her prediction to come true.  

In short, I think that the same sort of rationale oftentimes applies to interactions between providers and potential clients/stalkers.  Ladies may act in a ways that makes their initial belief come true.  A potential client is treated as creepy because his intentions are misunderstood.  Then because the potential client feels as though she got it wrong --- and that her opinion is not based on a logical interpretation of events and/or that her decision or action is arbitrary --- he will focus on proving her wrong.  Which will confirm her initial thoughts that yes he is indeed a stalker.      

"Any positive or negative expectation about circumstances, events, or people that may affect a person's behavior toward them in a manner that causes those expectations to be fulfilled.  An employer who, for example, expects the employees to be disloyal and shirkers, will likely treat them in a way that will elicit the very response he or she expects."  
- URBAN DICTIONARY

"The term “self-fulfilling prophecy” (SFP) was coined in 1948 by Robert Merton to describe “a false definition of the situation evoking a new behavior which makes the originally false conception come true” (Merton 1968: 477). He illustrated the concept with a run on a bank (a fictitious “parable”); his main application was to racial discrimination. The term has since entered social science and even everyday English, a rare feat for a sociological neologism. The concept has been subsequently rediscovered or renamed as the “Oedipus effect” (Popper 1957), “bootstrapped induction” (Barnes 1983), or “Barnesian performativity” (MacKenzie 2006). SFP has been discerned in a congeries of processes (e.g. Henschel 1978): within an individual, as with placebo response; in relations between individuals, such as teacher and student; in relations between collective actors, like states; underlying institutions, such as banks and financial markets; and, most provocatively, between social theory and social reality.

SFP is a particular type of dynamic process. It is not the truism that people’s perceptions depend on their prior beliefs. Nor is it the truism that beliefs, even false ones, have real consequences. To count as SFP, a belief must have consequences of a peculiar kind: consequences that make reality conform to the initial belief. Moreover, there is an additional defining criterion. The actors within the process—or at least some of them—fail to understand how their own belief has helped to construct that reality; because their belief is eventually validated, they assume that it had been true at the outset. This misapprehension is implicit in Merton’s account. His examples are social pathologies, but not merely in the sense that they are socially undesirable. They are “pathological” for being predicated on misunderstanding. Depositors fail to realize that their own panicked withdrawals cause the bank to collapse; whites fail to realize that their own racial discrimination makes African Americans seem intellectually inferior."
- OXFORD HANDBOOK

-- Modified on 7/19/2017 11:24:57 PM

BigPapasan 3 Reviews 94 reads
posted
2 / 48

...ARE creepy and potential stalkers.  If she doesn't want to see you, move on!  Why would you want to bang your head against the wall just to try to get to bang a provider who has made up her mind about you, rightly or wrongly?

There are...

souls_harbor 51 reads
posted
3 / 48

This might all be true.  But I'll move on if they don't respond in 48 hours, let alone give a reason.   I actually composed a spreadsheet of the ones I want to see -- and the funds to see them all just can't be justified.  If one drops off the list, the list is still huge.

rrasha88 See my TER Reviews 80 reads
posted
4 / 48

Your argument requires us to believe that stalking is a normative behavior response to rejection. I assure you, such is not the case. Stalking is a pathology evidenced by inept interpersonal skills, a sense of entitlement, erotomaniac delusions and most importantly, obliviousness to the victim’s response. These manifestations exist long before the client even contacts a provider.  

 
To suggest that someone becomes a stalker because they seek closure is like saying someone becomes an alcoholic because they’re thirsty.    

AnOfficerandaGentlemen 57 reads
posted
5 / 48

More like getting up and dusting yourself off after falling on your face.   Or ensuring this time that they are not misunderstood.   Which are normal responses.   Moving on is a response that may require new conditioning.   Especially for new folks.  Personally,  I would just move on and look at it as she just saved me $500.

-- Modified on 7/20/2017 7:19:35 AM

micktoz 43 Reviews 101 reads
posted
6 / 48

The poor stalker just couldn't help himself. It must be her freaking fault.  
Taking a backwards step in evolution one more time, OP.

mrfisher 115 Reviews 52 reads
posted
7 / 48
The_Berry See my TER Reviews 100 reads
posted
8 / 48
GaGambler 82 reads
posted
10 / 48

You sound more like the guy standing over a dead girls body with a bloody knife in his hand pleading to the cops "she drove me to it, if she had just "talked to me" I wouldn't have had to kill her"

 
I will concede you are good for a few laughs and the opportunity to try out some new material. lol

 
Wise move posting under an alias too. Anyone posting this drivel under his real handle would be doing a lot of "moving on" as every hooker on the board would have you on their "must miss" list.

2648667 31 Reviews 48 reads
posted
11 / 48

I thought about saying seek help before you get arrested, but I believe his being arrested would be good for the community, overall.

STPhomer 176 Reviews 66 reads
posted
12 / 48

It's always the woman's fault. After all ,  the first lesson in the Bible is the " woman tricked me into eating the damn fruit"!
And rape is always triggered by a woman's inappropriate  dress or behavior. And " no" really means " yes.....F me hard " .

As other board psychologists have pointed out your perspective reflects a dangerous attempt of rationalization.
Or you're simply an idiot.
At least you were smart enough to use an alias.  Actually most stalkers ( that would be you) are pretty clever about these things.  

Please get help.

AnOfficerandaGentlemen 61 reads
posted
13 / 48

I do just move on.  But that is because I have been doing this for years, want to avoid nonsense and drama, and believe that is the most efficient response.  Probably most everyone who reads and posts on these boards does the same.  Most of us have lists of ladies 10+ deep.  For the newbie or less established it is probably a different story.  Don't shoot the messenger I am just trying to provide insight into how these guys think to prevent problems.

AnOfficerandaGentlemen 61 reads
posted
14 / 48

No I think that guys should encourage guys to move on and ladies should reflect on how they could prevent problems.  Everyone always wants to escalate rather than deescalate,  not acknowledge how others feel, be callous, and not give people opportunities for growth.

2648667 31 Reviews 99 reads
posted
15 / 48

You just said "You are missing the point." To yourself. I agree! LMFAO

AnOfficerandaGentlemen 57 reads
posted
16 / 48

This is NOT my thinking.  I am explaining the undesirable behavior and WHY some of these guys react this way so that people could better understand the problem.   I knew that many wouldn't get it.

Jacque_Jenesais See my TER Reviews 78 reads
posted
17 / 48
Jacque_Jenesais See my TER Reviews 52 reads
posted
18 / 48

Yikes!

How about this? Someone is learning to listen to their intuition, notices red flags, but wants to think the best. So they give the guy/lady a chance. After all, they say they're not "that guy."

Self fulfilled prophecy: "There really aren't a lot of people out there who want to invade my privacy. That's just a self fulfilled prophecy. So I'll give this guy/lady a chance. They're probably just socially awkward. I'll give them a chance."

Guy/lady who is overbearing and crosses small personal space boundaries in the beginning becomes normal and respectful, and never stalks nor becomes too obsessed.  

Everything is now rosy.

AnOfficerandaGentlemen 50 reads
posted
19 / 48

Much better to trust your intuition, turn him down, but do so empathically in a way that is appropriate if the situation merits that.  Recognize that every situation is different.  Just reject him the way that you would want to be rejected.  

JackDunphy 74 reads
posted
20 / 48

Be honest. You hacked my email and plagiarized my shit, didn't you? :D :D

AnOfficerandaGentlemen 60 reads
posted
21 / 48

Nah,

How about something like:

Dude.  Wtf?  You are creepy.  Yuck.

Another Courtney stalker has been created.

Or you might be better off with a little gentler, kinder touch.  

The guys on the boards can beat him over the head indirectly or literally since that is how many of them see their role.

-- Modified on 7/20/2017 2:06:43 PM

GaGambler 99 reads
posted
22 / 48

and if a hooker doesn't get back to me, I barely even notice in most cases as by the time I have figured out she hasn't gotten back to me, most likely I will have already been with three or four other women.  

 
As I've said on a couple of occasions, I am on SA quite a bit and I message a LOT of women who never get back to me, If I obsessed over every one of them I'd be a nut case by now, AND if I had to give an explanation to every POT SB who messaged me that I have no interest in I wouldn't have time to be TER's biggest blabbermouth as sending all those "polite rejections" would take up every waking hour.

 
IMHO, the best way to reject a client is the way Deb has suggested, just stop replying.  I can only pity the poor woman who has to explain to you why she won't see your dumb ass. I can just imagine the endless "please just give me one more chance" messages she is getting from you.

Ladmo 80 reads
posted
23 / 48

Thanks for taking the time to explain it to him. I was just going to say that his hypothesis was lame...

Oldtimemonger 83 reads
posted
24 / 48

Your OP would have made more sense if the hypothesis was about what type of tricks become that way rather than blaming the victim.

coeur-de-lion 400 Reviews 61 reads
posted
25 / 48

lists of ladies that are 10+ deep.  I only need 7-8 deep, so that's what's on my list.  Kudo's to you, big boy, if you need 10+ deep.  

HappyChanges 50 reads
posted
26 / 48

alcoholics out of this. We tend to drink because we're thirsty.

CamilleUK See my TER Reviews 70 reads
posted
27 / 48

Your third paragraph (where you give an example of the husband and wife) is known as law of attraction. There's a shitload of books/theories etc about this (the most widely known probably 'The Secret') with divided opinions. It seem to be either accepted (like a lightbulb moment) or completely rejected as utter bullshit. I haven't ever really seen anything in between. The law of attraction is widely used for mindset coaching (Tony Robbins we al) and is heavily utilised in networking marketing. Controversial? Yes. Proven to work? Yes

The stalking example is a predisposition though. The law of attraction will not work with a predisposed mindset so that's not a good example

C
Posted By: AnOfficerandaGentlemen

Everyone agrees that stalkers are bad and should be deterred.  Everyone agrees that safety is important.  Everyone, however, won't agree with this post.  But hopefully this post will elevate the discussion.  Wishful thinking?At any rate ...      
   
 I suspect that many providers unintentionally create self-fulfilling prophecies with potential clients.    
   
 For example, if a woman thinks that her husband will leave her for another woman, she will act in ways that will directly or indirectly cause her belief to come true. She might get jealous easily and make a fuss about him being friends with other women. She might pick fights whenever she suspects that he is cheating on her, or she might go through his personal things to look for evidence of cheating. Eventually, her actions will put a strain on their marriage, and her husband just might leave her, causing her prediction to come true.    
   
 In short, I think that the same sort of rationale oftentimes applies to interactions between providers and potential clients/stalkers.  Ladies may act in a ways that makes their initial belief come true.  A potential client is treated as creepy because his intentions are misunderstood.  Then because the potential client feels as though she got it wrong --- and that her opinion is not based on a logical interpretation of events and/or that her decision or action is arbitrary --- he will focus on proving her wrong.  Which will confirm her initial thoughts that yes he is indeed a stalker.        
   
 "Any positive or negative expectation about circumstances, events, or people that may affect a person's behavior toward them in a manner that causes those expectations to be fulfilled.  An employer who, for example, expects the employees to be disloyal and shirkers, will likely treat them in a way that will elicit the very response he or she expects."  
 - URBAN DICTIONARY  
   
 "The term “self-fulfilling prophecy” (SFP) was coined in 1948 by Robert Merton to describe “a false definition of the situation evoking a new behavior which makes the originally false conception come true” (Merton 1968: 477). He illustrated the concept with a run on a bank (a fictitious “parable”); his main application was to racial discrimination. The term has since entered social science and even everyday English, a rare feat for a sociological neologism. The concept has been subsequently rediscovered or renamed as the “Oedipus effect” (Popper 1957), “bootstrapped induction” (Barnes 1983), or “Barnesian performativity” (MacKenzie 2006). SFP has been discerned in a congeries of processes (e.g. Henschel 1978): within an individual, as with placebo response; in relations between individuals, such as teacher and student; in relations between collective actors, like states; underlying institutions, such as banks and financial markets; and, most provocatively, between social theory and social reality.  
   
 SFP is a particular type of dynamic process. It is not the truism that people’s perceptions depend on their prior beliefs. Nor is it the truism that beliefs, even false ones, have real consequences. To count as SFP, a belief must have consequences of a peculiar kind: consequences that make reality conform to the initial belief. Moreover, there is an additional defining criterion. The actors within the process—or at least some of them—fail to understand how their own belief has helped to construct that reality; because their belief is eventually validated, they assume that it had been true at the outset. This misapprehension is implicit in Merton’s account. His examples are social pathologies, but not merely in the sense that they are socially undesirable. They are “pathological” for being predicated on misunderstanding. Depositors fail to realize that their own panicked withdrawals cause the bank to collapse; whites fail to realize that their own racial discrimination makes African Americans seem intellectually inferior."  
 - OXFORD HANDBOOK

-- Modified on 7/19/2017 11:24:57 PM

Jacque_Jenesais See my TER Reviews 106 reads
posted
28 / 48

Because of things that I've said and done in my past that were pretty shitty or not appropriate strong reactions, I've lost some friends. However, I am still thankful to them for getting in my face and rudely confronting me, telling the public even, and being extremely straightforward and very harsh about it. Was that the perfect response? I don't know. But it worked. I learned a valuable life lesson that I will never forget. Sure, it hurt, but sometimes the painful truth is what helps us change. Or realize what we're doing. Sometimes when you cry mercy, and people keep kicking you, yeah. That's wrong. If the person backs off and changes, then it's time to back off.

People think niceness relates to kindness, and it doesn't always. Sure, A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger. However, a harsh truth is necessary sometimes.

Making a mountain out of a mole hill, lacking tact, or being outright cynically mean before knowing the whole situation, or before taking the time to understand the other person's side can backfire. People value being understood and heard. And sometimes the wrong guy gets caught in the crossfire. I won't deny that.

 People value being understood and heard. And sometimes the wrong guy gets caught in the crossfire. I won't deny that.  

I can look back and see where I've made mistakes. In fact, I have been confronted very strongly about those mistakes, and encountered some serious consequences for it. But I look back, and I am thankful for those mistakes and confrontations because those strong confrontations protect me in the future once I decided consider them.  

But that doesn't mean I'm going to move forward and not have my eyes open.  

You posted an OP essentially saying, don't keep your eyes open because it's going to make people start stalking you, and you are at fault for it because you were watching them. Don't you think people are going to disagree with you?  

I think there are a lot of good thoughts to chew on in the OP.  I'm hearing what you mean, but there are certain things said that insinuate a person keeping their eyes open is the reason they see the signs. They're "making things up". E.g. Delusional. The whole point of seeing signs is by keeping your eyes open.  

I think that's why people are disagreeing with you.  

There's a line to be drawn between being over cautious, and being brainwashable. That's how religious cults get ya. Some shun you for questioning anything. And god forbid you bring anything public dename the religion.

Shhhh. Don't tell is isolation. Sure, people don't do things perfectly, but sometimes it's nice to be able to bring something out into the community without mentioning exact names. To talk about it. None of us should be alone in this

I believe the majority of people here are trying to do their best at dealing with these situations. There are a lot of wonderful people who don't do everything perfectly. Sometimes there is no "perfect" in confrontation. there needs to be some grace, but at the same time if we've got somebody harassing providers who are saying no, I think that is a subject that needs to be talked about.  

Personally, I think that is a great reason for having community.

AnOfficerandaGentlemen 51 reads
posted
29 / 48
AnOfficerandaGentlemen 116 reads
posted
32 / 48

Again, you seem to miss the point and irrationally influence others to do the same.  You could just randomly post something entirely misleading and nonsensical in the middle of a thread and shape the thoughts of those who can't think for themselves.

AnOfficerandaGentlemen 64 reads
posted
33 / 48

I have been told that GaGa may have some redeeming qualities.

GaGambler 90 reads
posted
34 / 48

and those are my best qualities, some people might find them redeeming I suppose. lol

AnOfficerandaGentlemen 65 reads
posted
35 / 48

Yes, but you are not insecure.  That is the only redeeming quality that we were able to come up with.

Jacque_Jenesais See my TER Reviews 77 reads
posted
36 / 48

This is getting weird.  

This does sound a little isolating and "brain-washey"

Yowzahs.

Sheila Starr See my TER Reviews 64 reads
posted
37 / 48

Talking is one of them, and So Many Other Things To Do With Our Mouths .
Get my drift.. KISS,  KEEP IT SIMPLE SEXY!! AND FUN .
WINK

EuroModelsShown 121 reads
posted
38 / 48

Based upon that interpretation are you telling me you can't see any validity in that verse?

 

What I find more disturbing is that you jump to something completely different and start talking about rape and disrespecting women.

 
Can I psycho analysis you now?

Freda_Fuddpucker 69 reads
posted
39 / 48

Chick tries to be nice, says "sorry but I'm afraid I must decline your offer because you made me feel uncomfortable.  best of luck out there!"  

He hears: "try again another time"  and so he does, over and over till he's blowing up her inbox.

Freda_Fuddpucker 65 reads
posted
40 / 48

Her: Dude, you're creepy. Go away.

Him: He goes away, thinking she's a bitch.  

 
THAT is the norm response.

micktoz 43 Reviews 53 reads
posted
41 / 48

Oh , we get what you wrote.  
You were explaining the errant thinking and why these guys have these expectations.  

Thanks for "mansplaining" the obvious.   Your explanation leaves us with the impression that it's everyone else's fault other than the arsehole that is doing the behavior.  

Perhaps posting a solution would be better than telling everyone what you told us.

JakeFromStateFarm 62 reads
posted
42 / 48

Poor Duncey can barely write a coherent sentence and routinely butchers simple English.

1256849 25 Reviews 53 reads
posted
43 / 48

Over thinker. Relax, fun, and keep things professional.  How much time do you have on your hands?

Durhamdrew 19 Reviews 64 reads
posted
45 / 48
MasterZen 34 Reviews 58 reads
posted
46 / 48

Justifying creepy stalker behavior is condoning it, in my book.  People know (and I mean Guys and Gals can be stalkers) when they are "stalking" and they do it because THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT.  

Call them out, shame them, embarrass them and they generally go away.  Those that don't... they are perhaps pathological. But to blame the victim for creating a "Self-Fulfilling Prophecy"? That is absurd.

HappyChanges 59 reads
posted
47 / 48
souls_harbor 58 reads
posted
48 / 48
Register Now!