Signaling

[cjsmith]

This morning I was thinking we need a way to signal straight.

Let's say I'm wanting to flirt with a chick. Let's say I don't know whether she's straight or not, and she doesn't know whether I am either. And it's way too early in this tentative teeny tiny flirtation here for the soul-searing horror of having to BRING IT UP IN CONVERSATION. That might let her know what I'm thinkin', see, and that's scary.

So I can signal not-straight. I can wear rainbow stuff, or triangles (how outdated!), or a number of other things. Some have the added advantage that few non-queer-friendly folk get the message. It's like a secret code. And with every single one of 'em I can deny that I made a point of sending the message at all. Oh, no, I always wear my Michfest T-shirt on odd-numbered Tuesdays.

If I'm in luck, and she's not only not-straight but might be interested, my hypothetical cute gal can signal back. But she doesn't have any code she can send back, subtly, without loss of face on either side, to say she's straight. She can oh-so-casually mention a current or previous boyfriend, but that's awkward -- it commits the sin of bringing the subject closer to ACTUAL CONVERSATION, which as noted before is verboten this early in the game. Plus it does not successfully signal not-bi.

I suggest pinstripes.

Comments

[branwynelf.livejournal.com]

That last line made me choke on my coffee. Not sure why, but it has me giggling.

Pinstripes! Hee!

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

Oh good! I have correctly signaled "silly"! :-)

[quasigeostrophy.livejournal.com]

Being of that particular demographic, of course I've never thought of that - I think being straight is treated similarly to the concepts of darkness and cold (they don't really exist, they're just the absence of something else). I don't think that's right, on several levels, but I don't know if anything else will come up with regard to a different way of treating signalling until societal acceptance of not-straight people improves greatly.

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

I know it's treated that way, and in practical terms (for the majority) it even makes sense -- "nine out of ten" don't need the signal. But y'know, the other coupla million folks might like one. So maybe in a place like the San Francisco Bay Area, full of geeky people AND queer-aware folk, we might invent one. I hope it's better than pinstripes though!

[palecur.livejournal.com]

How about a taco with the red circle/slash for girls and a hot dog with the red circle/slash for boys?

this is all I could dig up on a quick google image search:

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

"Boycott Taco Bell" might be a little toooo far on the subtle side. ;-)

[abz6598.livejournal.com]

This morning I was thinking we need a way to signal straight.


A wedding ring would seem a good start.

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

Ain't what mine means.

[wcg.livejournal.com]

Oh no it wouldn't.

[mactavish.livejournal.com]

Not even.

[faeryguinevere.livejournal.com]

Doesn't work for me either.

[klwalton.livejournal.com]

Um (to add to the cacophony), no.

[therobbergirl.livejournal.com]

Here's how I see the problem:

Chris wants to tap the ass of Terry, but does not know if Terry would welcome said ass tappery from Chris. In this case, the cause of Chris's concern is both that Terry's plumbing is the same as that of Chris and that great big icky sploogey white head on the end of Chris's nose. So Chris performs a socially scripted mating ritual (May I join you for a drink? Would you like to join me for dinner at RESTAURAT REPUTED FOR DIM LIGHT? etc).

The trouble is that the socially scripted mating ritual is vague. Terry may not clue in that an ass tapping attempt is in progress, interpreting the ritual instead as a friendship creation ritual.

Such is the current state of dating.

What you're looking for is a way to do what dating people universally want to do -- remove everyone from the buffet that would not be interested in romantic and/or sexual encounters with you.

When you find this item, patent it, market it, buy gems and precious metals, and take a treasure bath.

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

That's an even better signal! I want to have a worldwide distribution network for T-shirts stating WOULD WELCOME ASS-TAPPERY FROM CJ and WOULD NOT WELCOME ASS-TAPPERY FROM CJ. The former would get you into all the good buffets.

[vito-excalibur.livejournal.com]

You! You have used this term! Perhaps you can explain it to me!

When you want to "tap someone's ass", does that mean you want to tap it with a light, sharp strike, or you want to tap it like a keg?

[dafydd.livejournal.com]

See, now, when I read the first line of this post, I thought you were going to talk about some idiot driver on the roads...

[busysuzy.livejournal.com]

So did I! I guess that goes to show how painfully straight I am! ; )

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

Augh! Another great post of mine, thus far unwritten! We need that signal TOO. Along with a (possibly out-of-band) signal for "This driver has no idea what blinking lights happen to be doing on his car, so please ignore them all, both those that blink and those that are currently dark. In fact, honk when you pass, so you wake him up before he misses his exit."

[tenacious-snail.livejournal.com]

I have no idea. I think I've been more often in the position of needing people to do a better job of signalling "not straight". But if this catches on, let me know.

[mactavish.livejournal.com]

Here I was all set to say, "CJ, meet T_S," forgetting you had. :)

[redgrrl.livejournal.com]

Ooo, pinstripes! I'm thinking something very fitted and sexy -- Joan Crawford-esque. I think Lisa would look FABULOUS in pinstripes! :)

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

Something like this, that says "Hey, I have lovely long legs and I'm perfectly okay with that"? :-)

[layer.livejournal.com]

okay, yeah. signal would be good. i have more than once found myself dancing with some hot woman then feeling really bad about the whole "sorry i don't swing that way i just like to dance" thing that follows.

we straight girls are dumb sometimes.

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

I've done that same kind of dumb. All the little assumptions can bite ya in the butt sometimes. I may not be straight but there are other reasons I'm not about to build a relationship with, say, the cute redhead in the lesbian dance club in Boston.

Tattoos. We need forehead tattoos. Here's mine. "I live in California and am in a committed relationship with a man; I am also bi; I like to dance and I think you are hot. Any questions?" :-)

[firecat]

Noooo, not pinstripes! I just bought a great pinstripe suit!

What I really care about when I meet someone hot is not whether they are heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual but whether they might be firecatsexual.

I'm in the slow flirting school also, so I wait and gather clues, and tell myself I wouldn't want the complications of people who rush into relationships anyway.

The world would certainly be a different place if people had a little red light on their foreheads that automatically lit up when they looked at someone they found attractive.

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

whether they might be firecatsexual

In all seriousness, yeah. And I certainly agree that the world would be different if we had those little red lights on our foreheads! Lots of implications would follow from that change, I think.

[lkeele.livejournal.com]

Now wait just a ding-dong minute here. I love my pinstripes.

I would have, once upon a time, suggested nail polish, but here I am with white polish still apparent on my toesies.

And do remember, girlfriend, that speaking of ones boyfriend, or even husband, doesn't necessarily mean "straight" either.

I suggest an I (heart) George W. t-shirt. ;)

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

Now wait just a ding-dong minute here. I love my pinstripes.

Did you like redgrrl's suggestion of something Joan-Crawford-like? ;-)

And do remember, girlfriend, that speaking of ones boyfriend, or even husband, doesn't necessarily mean "straight" either.

Gee, how can I remind myself that there are bi women who are partnered with men? Maybe rfrench can remind me sometimes! Hah! No, I did put the "Plus it does not successfully signal not-bi" near the end there.

I suggest an I (heart) George W. t-shirt. ;)

What, after that pileup on abz6958 for suggesting that all married women are straight and all straight women are married, you're gonna start the same thing about Republicans? Don your asbestos undies, woman! ;-)

Another bi-lesbian sheep, here...

[cyan-blue.livejournal.com]

I'm shy with signalling my intention to women, in a way that I'm not with men.

I suspect it's because I anticipate that men are more likely to welcome a subtle non-verbal come-on than women are.

Re: Another bi-lesbian sheep, here...

[lkeele.livejournal.com]

I'm completely the opposite. I'm exceedingly shy signalling with men ('cause most men I've met don't seem to need much prodding, so if there's going to be any slow about things, it's got to come from my end). I'm much more flirty with women.

[tytso.livejournal.com]

This could be framed as an interesting crypto/information hiding problem.

There is a certain amount of information that you don't want to disclose publically to said interesting potential romantic/sexual partner (i.e., whether or not you are interested, whether you are gay/straight, whether you are poly, etc.) and the other potential romantic/sexual partner similarly isn't willing to disclose said informally for all of the world to see. However, if the answers to these questions would indicate that there might be a potential for then --- and only then --- should this both parties be notified about this fact.

It's probably possible to solve this using Realy Clever Mathematics, but it's a lot easier with trusted hardware. So consider what would happen if people could purchase devices (probably integrated into cell phones, eventually), where the device would send out an a message with an ID number to all other participating devices over bluetooth (assume that all protocol exchanges are encrypted so that only trusted devices that do not "cheat" can decrypt them). Each person who participates in this is registered with a central, secure server which associates with your ID number the following information: a low-res picture, whether you are gay/straight/bi, whether you are poly or not, whether you are interested in people who are gay/straight/bi/poly, etc. So when someone sees someone which interests them, they excuse themselves, and their device sends the ID numbers that it has received in the past 10 minutes to the central server, which sends back the low-res pictures. That person then selects the picture for which they are interested, and only if the other person also subsequently indicates an interest do both people simultaneously get notified on their cell phone, via an SMS message, that there is a match.

The operator of the server, of course, can also make a mint collecting material suitable for blackmail, unless the privacy provisions prohibit it, which would be no fun. :-)

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

This could be framed as an interesting crypto/information hiding problem.

Yeah. This and all subparts: my interest in you could be disclosed only if you are also interested in me, my queerness could be disclosed only if you are not Fred Phelps, etc.

It's probably possible to solve this using Realy Clever Mathematics, but it's a lot easier with trusted hardware.

Ain't that the truth! :-)

So when someone sees someone which interests them, they excuse themselves...

I saw a writeup somewhere that went "When I'm interested I get near the other person (near that person's device, more accurately) and push a button. If they've pushed theirs too, my device lights up or buzzes or something." Keeps a lot less data, though, so you still have to figure out the poly thing and somehow determine exactly *which* button-push lit up your life.

and only if the other person also subsequently indicates an interest do both people simultaneously get notified on their cell phone, via an SMS message, that there is a match.

And a generation later, anyone hearing that SMS feep ... __ ... instantly thinks of sex. ;-)

Isn't it amazing the lengths we'll go to to avoid talking to each other?