"Wouldn't any man in his right mind know this invitation was out of bounds?"

Yes. It's so obvious that it doesn't even need any further comment than that.

You caught a huge break, LW. You found out he's a weirdo without even having to go on a date with him. By the third date, he would have been telling all his friends you were engaged.

***** If he's in possession of the Adult Social Skills worksheet, he'll keep that thought parked in its thought hangar*****

OMG that is seriously the best thing I have read all week.

Yeah, be thankful this guy let you know he was an idiot up front, LW.

Wouldn't any man in his right mind know this invitation was out of bounds?

Yes. Yes he would.

Sounds like LW dodged a bullet on that one.

a weekend getaway invite from some man she talked to at a meeting is probably about as tempting as "So...deserted country road at 8? I'll be the guy carrying the rope coil and the duct tape

Hahahaha! Awesome! :-)

When guys are younger, the mating ritual typically involves the guy working hard, the woman not so much, and people knowing the drill...so to speak. That sort of sets people's expectations about how dating works, and they carry that set of expectations forward during their lives.

But my observation is that as guys age, the guys' interest in acting like an eager, courtly 21 year old drops. A lot. I think this guy's approach here could reflect that more general shift in approach in guys as they age, and the lady was taken aback by it. She may still be operating using expectations established when she was 21.

I am not saying the guy discussed here was anything but odd, but she may be holding on to expectations formed at an age when guys were generally operating under a different mindset. As such, she may find her fifty-something experiences materially different than her twenty-something experiences.

Also, a thought occurred to me, and I toss it out there just for fun:

"I'm 50-something, as is this woman I met at a meeting for a nonprofit. We exchanged some emails, and then we decided to go out. The week before our date, she texted me, asking me to spend hundreds of dollars on a nice dinner, theater tickets and small gifts as part of the date. All in order for her to decide if we would have another date and, perhaps, eventually become more than 'just friends.'

She clearly wasn't kidding. I found this inappropriate -- my return text made that clear --and I nixed our date. She responded that she didn't want to be with anyone so stingy, who couldn't appreciate her enough to show her that sort of respect."

@Spartee: "Also, a thought occurred to me, and I toss it out there ..."

I don't think too many people would disagree that the hypothetical woman's approach was inappropriate. That's why initial dates should be small, modest affairs.

It is probably him, but I've known a few women who sent out signals like the answer would be yes...

It has been a long, long time, but answer may have been yes on one occasion long ago, when I was single. Not that I can remember that far back.

So where does one get their hands on an Adult Social Skills worksheets? Hypothetically speaking, of course.

*worksheet.

Need to remember that preview is my friend.

When guys are younger, the mating ritual typically involves the guy working hard, the woman not so much...

You're stretching this time, Spartee, and I gotta tell you that if you haven't included the respective grooming rituals of the young man and woman you're above statement is grossly incomplete.

There's a big, big difference between not wanting to act like a courtly 21 year old (though I don't recall a lot of those, actually) and thinking a near-stranger will want to spend several days out of town with you.

I'm almost 54, and happily married, but were I single again, I wouldn't expect a man to spend a ton of money on a first date. Hell, I didn't expect that when I was young.* "I'm going to the art show uptown, you want to come with me?" would do just fine. And if the chemistry was right, I wouldn't be above getting to know him better in bed. It wouldn't be the first time.

But go out of town for a couple of days with someone that I don't even know if I like yet, much less trust? I'd have to be crazy, stupid, or some combination of the two.

* First date with my husband consisted of a video rental and hot sex. And I paid for the video rental.

I find it interesting that the outlandish, ballsy (aka inappropriate) invitation was sent via text message. I know, texting is not just for teenagers anymore, but doesn't it seem like the perfect form of communication for noncommittal activities? Texting as a prelude to dating just seems like a terrible way to begin a relationship. Is it me, or is texting basically saying "I don't actually want (or have the stones) to call and SPEAK with you, I just want to give you the shorthand version, sans proper punctuation, thus enabling us to miscommunicate before we've ever even had one date." How do you build a relationship on that?

I have a friend who is on Match.com, looking for a boyfriend. She wants traditional things, not one night stands. We are in our late 30's, btw. But when numbers get exchanged, all they ever do is text, never call. I've seen this backfire on her (and the dudes) more than once now, because the communication is so degraded that intentions get misconstrued, and the whole thing becomes a shit show. The last guy did what LW's guy did, kinda. Got all forward and ahead of himself, via the texting, then when she said (via txt, of course) to back up a bit, he was all offended. What planet are people on? And what ever happened to normal communication, thus enabling people to parse the nutjobs from the normals?

I know, I got off topic and onto my own beef w texting. Sure, it's fine when I'm at the grocery store and I text my mom to find out the ingredients in that salad dressing she makes, and who knows, if texting was even a thing when my husband and I started dating, maybe I'd think differently, but my opinion is that while the LW was busy dodging a bullet with Mr. POP (Punitive Overjealous Perv - at worst - or Desperate Dreamer who needs a reality check, at best), she also found herself inadvertently experiencing firsthand the downfall of human interaction via today's 'advanced' technology. Bummer.

Lori M's got it right. And I think ORD got it right as well, LW dodged a bullet. I'm in that age range, and if any guy I didn't know wanted me to take a "several-day trip" with him, that would be a HUGE red flag. No thanks!

I'm "of that age" too, and if any guy texted me to ask me on a date, THAT would be a huge red flag. Texting has its place, but it's not in getting to know a potential new romance. Too much ambiguity for me.

if you haven't included the respective grooming rituals of the young man and woman you're above statement is grossly incomplete.

Agreed. It's easy for men to miss the behind-the-scenes stuff. We've heard over and over that men are more visual than women, and that visual involves time and money.

Most American men seem to prefer women who don't have hair on their legs, underarms and face, and many like the pubes shaved. That takes time. They like women who are pretty, and that costs time and money in makeup, skin care products, hair styling (at home and at a hair salon) and attractive clothes and lingerie. Dieting and exercise to stay slim are other factors. "Natural" beauty doesn't mean rolling out of bed looking like Aphrodite, and some women need more work than others.

When you take all of that into account, a woman can easily outspend a man in time and cash for one date.

Glad to hear I'm not alone with the texting thing...I tried to tell my friend that she's gotta insist on actual phone calls for dating purposes, but besides the fact that she's stubborn as a mule about it & doesn't seem to understand that she's condoning it by perpetuating it, she feels as if she "shouldn't have to beg to get a guy to WANT to call." He should just 'want to.'

This makes me think of Spartee's comment, about how as we age, guys don't feel like they have to play the Prince Charming 'I'll take care of everything' role as much (I also agree that 20-somethings aren't exactly doing that, either, so who knows). But maybe there is something to Spartee's idea about women holding on to expectations that aren't realistic in an older age range?

I know, off topic again, I'm sorry...I don't think LW had incorrect expectations, but her date certainly did!

I know I'm spending too much time on this thread, but MonicaP just made an excellent point.

I read recently a stupid article where guys talked about what turned them off from the ladies, and more than half of the stuff were things like, 'taking too long to get ready' or generally being high maintenance in their bathroom rituals. BUT, those same guys wanted women to look 'put together' and like they've 'made an effort' to look good. So which is it?

@Dana . . . I 's see, one first date was to a coffee shop and cheap Indian food. That one's at two years and still going strong. Usually we're too busy having great sex to bother with movies, dinner, or anything else. My longest-term relationship, our first date was a punk show and a bottle of Jack (okay, that was a long time ago). Smart, funny, loving, and hot are so much more important than rich. That was true for me when I was 15 and it's true now, 30+ years later.

Weird. The comments box eviscerated my comment. Let's try that again.

@Dana . . . Indeed. I just had a giant argument with a male friend (who is smart, funny, and attractive, but has kind of low self-esteem) around the contention, "I'll never meet anyone because women only go for guys with nice cars and tons of cash." I was like "Yeah, shallow women maybe, or women whose biological clock is ringing like a dinner bell. But you don't want one of those. You want someone fun!". Of the last few serious relationships I've had . . . let's see, one first date was to a coffee shop and cheap Indian food. That one's at two years and still going strong. Usually we're too busy having great sex to bother with movies, dinner, or anything else. My longest-term relationship, our first date was a punk show and a bottle of Jack (okay, that was a long time ago). Smart, funny, loving, and hot are so much more important than rich. That was true for me when I was 15 and it's true now, 30+ years later.

You know, its funny this should be published now.

I'm a 34 year old man. I'm going out this weekend with a 27 year old woman. We're both Americans living in Seoul, South Korea. We met on facebook through a mutual friend, a small business owner whose business I bought part ownership of a few years ago. She's getting out of a, for lack of a better word, "mortifying" relationship. (mortifying was how she described it)

After a little back and forth flirting on facebook, and some intelligent conversation, we traded phone numbers, traded jokes, traded a few stories.

I've got a date this weekend. I'm happy. It'll be fun, I like pretty girls that can also hold conversation at length.

But what is more, I was planning a 3 day trip down to Busan at the end of the month, its been a rough few months at work and its a miniature vacation for me. And on impulse, I invited her to go along with me.

She said yes. Obviously we're both expecting sex. (I refuse to believe any woman is stupid enough to argue otherwise)

Was my invitation "out there" sotospeak? Sure, but I was planning on going one way or the other. Did it cross a boundry? Some women might say "Yes" for reasons of which are their own, and I'm sure seem very good to them. And if I were a complete unknown stranger with no ties known to her to anyone or anything, any woman would be wise indeed to say "NO!" to that invitation.

But as we have friends in common and we're neither of us known by anyone of our friends to be batshit crazy, she felt comfortable enough to say "Yes" to this invite, with the caveat that it depends on how our first two dates go.

Are we violating convention or standards? Perhaps for some, but the LW in this case, I can't help but think of as being hesitant and timid.

Frankly the guy seems a little whiney. But I can't help but imagine her as a cat lady that thinks of courting, dating, and sex, in the same light as her grandparents, and not the fun ones that enjoyed the roaring 20s. I mean the stuffy ones protesting to start prohibition.

Sure I may be wrong, but that is what comes to mind for me having read this one.

No, no, Robert, don't misunderstand. You and your friend are still young, and spontenaity is a good thing, within reason. Did you text her or did you ask her face to face, or on the phone? Because I think you were being reasonable here. Go on your dates, see how things go, and if all seems well, enjoy your mini-vacation. It seems reasonable that she might feel the need for a mini-vaca too. But also, during date number 2, in anticipation of the mini-vaca, be upfront about who will be paying for what, what the arrangements will be, etc. See how willing she is to at least share some of the costs.

Dang! I'm a little jealous, even. BF and I are going to Gettysburg next weekend. Seems kind of tame...

In Robert's case, the fact that they have mutual real life friends makes a world of difference. I first "met" my husband on the internet, but he worked with a friend of mine's son, and was a family friend for several years. They knew him well, and introduced him to me thru an online game.

The LW's situation, on the other hand, does not have that advantage. She is wise to be cautious.

Perhaps I'm reading the LW the wrong way. When I read what she wrote, it sounded to me like they were working together AT a nonprofit. Which I assumed meant they have people in common.

And after further consideration, he does sound a little (actually a lot, I tend to understate things) rushed. Although it may also be how he phrased it. By way of example if he'd said, "Hey if this date goes well, why not join me on this weekend I'm planning out of town on datehere?"

The key in this hypothetical is that it would be that he already had something planned, it wasn't a plan to spirit her away on a whirlwind of sex in another city, he'd just enjoy her company as a bonus.

But planning to go away with her BECAUSE of their going on a date...he's hurried and she's justified in backing away.

-----

Now in my case, we started on facebook messaging, then texting, then phone conversation, our first date will actually be our first meeting.

Honestly I'm not to worried about the money thing, Busan has lots of low cost things to do, and I recieved a comfortable boost in my monthly income this month, so I'm OK about splurging a little on a pretty girl.

Now if on our first date she orders the most expensive items on the menu...then that will be a conversation I would hold before desert. 'l'

"Hey if this date goes well, why not join me on this weekend I'm planning out of town on datehere?"

That would be great, but it doesn't fit well in a text message.

"for a woman who isn't 22 and really impulsive or a needy mess"
At least you put in that qualifier, but I think you need to up the age a bit say to 30.

The brother of a friend of mine, is a real player and traveles a lot for work, he rarely travels alone. I'd put their whole family in the not normal catagory, not creepy, but whatever gene gives humans caution, they don't have it.
Was at a dinner with them, he hit on the waitress, who I'd put at 28 ish. By end of dinner had asked her to go to Paris with him, and got her phone number. He claimed have a very good acceptance rate on his various trips.

"When you take all of that into account, a woman can easily outspend a man in time and cash for one date."

Only if you ignore that women expect a man to not live in his parents basement or pick them up on a bicycle. I have known several women who hold the opinion that they would never date a guy who didn't have a car, even though they were carless.
Frankly with one I think that's the main reason why she dates, so she can go places the subway doesn't.
Cars, homes and nice apartments don't come cheap.

Wouldn't any man in his right mind know this invitation was out of bounds?

Most guys wouldn't extend a invitation like that because they realize that most women would find it inappropriate. I sure wouldn't do it. But that doesn't mean all women would be averse to it and perhaps this guy is looking for the kind of woman who's not.

I read recently a stupid article where guys talked about what turned them off from the ladies, and more than half of the stuff were things like, 'taking too long to get ready' or generally being high maintenance in their bathroom rituals. BUT, those same guys wanted women to look 'put together' and like they've 'made an effort' to look good. So which is it?

Lori, to me, looking good and spending a minimal amount of time to get ready aren't mutually exclusive. I've had girlfriends who looked fantastic in just Levis and a t-shirt, and without a ton of makeup. They looked "put together" in a simple but sexy way.

But that's me. Maybe, for other guys, "put together" means looking like a cover girl and they expect a woman to look like that with a minimal amount of time.

Only if you ignore that women expect a man to not live in his parents basement or pick them up on a bicycle. I have known several women who hold the opinion that they would never date a guy who didn't have a car, even though they were carless.

I would expect that a man wouldn't want to live in his parents' basement anyway, with or without a woman. I certainly didn't live in my parents' basement, and it had nothing to do with dating. Living with your parents sucks, and no adult should want to do it without extenuating circumstances. Same for a car. A car has many uses, like for getting to work, and I don't know a single man who got one just because of a woman. Also, living in NYC, plenty of men I knew didn't have cars and still got plenty of action. It just wasn't practical to have a car in many parts of the city.

Lori, to me, looking good and spending a minimal amount of time to get ready aren't mutually exclusive. I've had girlfriends who looked fantastic in just Levis and a t-shirt, and without a ton of makeup. They looked "put together" in a simple but sexy way.

Some women can pull this off. Even these women need to shave their body hair and get regular haircuts that are almost always more expensive than a man would pay. Even a minimal amount of makeup costs money, and it is a special skill to wear makeup in a way that looks like you're not wearing much. That still takes time.

I wasn't trying to start a debate over which sex has it "worse." Neither does. Dating doesn't have to be ridiculously expensive. If it is, then a guy is clearly trying to attract the kind of woman who wants ridiculously expensive dates, and I don't have much sympathy when he gets what he pays for. I know far too many women who aren't like this for me to think they're the exception to the rule.

The first few dates should be low-key. I always had my own transportation secured until I got to know him a bit. These dates can be a lot of fun without breaking the bank. Since, traditionally, men do the asking, they get to decide what they can afford and want to spend. If she balks because it isn't expensive enough for her, then you know what kind of woman she is and can move on.

Dating doesn't have to be ridiculously expensive.

The first few dates should be low-key.

If she balks because it isn't expensive enough for her, then you know what kind of woman she is and can move on.

Monica, agree, agree and agree.

I think its this guy´s communication style that stinks. With the right guy, I would agree to go on an interesting 3 day trip after a couple in person encounters felt OK. I would however have to know that sex expectations were ambiguous - that´s easy, just get separate rooms and keep it loose, spontaneous. If he had waited after date 1, if that went well just suggested a trip that was recreational, like Robert in Korea - its also a thing being an expat and seeking exploration of the country with a compatriot that allows norms to be flexible. but this guy got mad at her and all huffy - that´s the disqualifier.

I think whether or not this is an appropriate dating approach depends on the person. If someone is genuinely spontaneous, adventurous, outgoing, and laidback--the kind of person who backpacks through Europe or flies across the country at the drop of the hat--then inviting a virtual stranger on vacation is probably just a natural extension of their personality. Undoubtably that type of person is looking for an equally spontaneous and adventurous partner, and this approach is a fast way to screen out people who aren't on the same wavelength.

On the other hand, the invitation could be a sign that the person trying to artificially force a relationship and/or unaware of social norms. And judging by the guy's reaction to the LW's response, that's probably what's going on here. An impulsive, live-and-let-live type of guy would shrug his shoulders, say no problem, and immediately move on with no hard feelings; he wouldn't get touchy and defensive as did the man here. Either way LW clearly isn't compatible with the guy, but it sounds like she dodged a bullet as well.

HELLLOOOO.....I cannot believe that I am the first to mention this. The guy is married. That's why they "met" at a conference, cause his spouse wasn't there. That's why he is texting, spouse could be sitting across from him doing the crossword. And that is why the dates have to be out of town.