I look forward to trying it.

you should say "stop" not "it's getting late". When men hear "stop" they usually interpret correctly. When they hear "it's getting late" who knows what they will do?

>>In conclusion, it appears that 'no' does not always mean 'no'.

> Wrong. No means no, always.

Always? That's like saying it's always illegal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theatre. It's not. For example: When there IS an actual fire in the theatre.

Similarly per sex:

HE: "Do you want me to stop?"

SHE: "No."

What does her No mean?

It's an insult to men to deny that social interactions are complex. It's especially insulting when feminist issue fatwas that let passive women unilaterally judge men they insist/expect to take all social risks.

Enough! You want more social clarity? Insist that women begin making THEIR needs known.

Actually, now that you've clarified it more, I get where you're coming from about entitlement.

I've also known some very beautiful women who were very unhappy and didn't consider their good looks a bonus. It didn't stop some of them from using it to their advantage when scoring free drinks from bartenders but in regular dating situations they were far more reserved and skeptical of a man's true intentions.

It being something of a Canadian classic, I know a bit about this.

I'm not sure that whole or split makes much difference in the peas, and traditional French Canadian soup uses yellow peas almost as often as green; I can't tell much difference in flavour, but the green stuff is more aesthetically pleasing I think.

I do recommend some dead pig flesh, or more importantly, a ham-bone and some fat, which adds gelatin and salt (if so, drop the bouillon and be careful with any extra salt). The pepper is quite important.

It is a meal that sticks to the ribs, and is damn damn good. It was also the staple of the voyageurs that explored most of North America; and they were typically down-trodden men with communication problems with women that were notorious, since the women in question were usual non-french speaking aboriginals. But we got the Metis anyway, and eventually through my mom, me.

The difference between whole and split green peas is that with the latter, you're bound to get a thicker, more porridge-like soup because the split peas will practically dissolve away, whereas whole peas tend to keep their integrity.

There's nothing wrong with split pea soup (whether green or yellow). In fact, it's one of my favorites, but FWIW, I and my wife greatly prefer the whole pea version.

Yep, like the old saying goes: whole peas, whole relationship.

> "Men need to learn that they are under no obligation

>to try to second-guess what a woman says."

Brilliant! And how refreshingly unusual an interpretation. Instead of seeing the woman's No as a challenge to overcome, it's deemed a simplifying fact. It frees the man, stops him from wasting time.

Why should a guy have to "change" a woman's mind? Is she a car being sold to a reluctant buyer or a human who needs sex just as much a man does?

I think walter_map is onto something, a perception that empowers men. It's subtle, but critical.

Women are free to say No, just like they can cry “Wolf!” What they can't do is avoid the consequences. If a woman is routinely dishonest she risks being preyed upon, just like the person facing a wolf alone because no one believes her any more. I’m not talking about being physically abused. I’m talking about driving good guys away and attracting users.

Trying to figure out which No a woman means makes the guy a supplicant. It puts her above him. It lets her stay vague and avoid responsibility. She can always blame the guy for “misunderstandings.”

If a guy takes every No literally, though, then HE decides what to do. Instead of overcoming "last minute resistance," he can leave. Why stay and put himself down, putting her on a pedestal? If he offered her food and she refused would he try to feed her? If she doesn't know if she's hungry or not, that’s her problem. If she starves, her choice. Don’t become a lapdog doing tricks for table scraps. Find a woman who knows what she wants!

A guy who manipulates a woman for sex makes HER the prize. He assumes the burden of making her happy. Why do it? Better to be alone for a while than humiliate yourself for poonani. It ain’t like there’s a shortage.

I read a forum once where guys talked about what to do when other men intrude on an ongoing conversation with a woman. Each guys offered a way to neutralize the "poachers." One man refused do anything. He said he just whispered in the woman's ear, "I think that's the ONE!" and walked away. He refused to his waste time trying to "win over" a reluctant woman. If she wasn't into him...he walked. He valued himself. He didn't put the woman down, just treated her like ice cream he didn't like. Next!

The odd thing, he found out, was that about 60% of the time the woman sought him out later. That's not why he whispered into to her ear, though. He sincerely meant that if she wasn't into him another woman would be...and he was off to meet HER. He suspected the reluctant woman was intrigued by his refusal to jump through hoops to get her attention.

So guys actually benefit from the simplistic feminist edict to treat No as No. It frees them, saves them time. It also forces women to know what they want or suffer the fools that stick around.

In the end, game-playing women and PUA "players" deserve each other.

I agree with this, too: "Don't you pursue her. Let her figure out what she wants. Don't try making up her mind for her." Too few guys ask if women are worthy of them. They will, as a rule, "eat a mile of her poop to see where it comes from." They don't see women as equals…with equal volition and sexual needs. Guys don’t “get” that women who complain about meeting only "jerks" CHOOSE that scenario. By making guys come to them, by not being direct or honest, they limit their choices. They chase good guys way, attracting ones who play games.

Maybe there is rough justice after all. Maybe for every guy who suffers from being "too nice," there's a woman used/abused by guys who learned to play her game and trumped her. After all, women DO teach men how they want to be treated.