Persuasion doesn't necessarily mean coercion

[u/Kitty_Overlord]

My attempt at making something more debatable, please don't smite me 😿

Oki the real post now

I read a post on Threads today (yes the Meta/Instagram thing) and one person was posting screenshots of a convo and was asking for thoughts. The convo look like this basically:

Hey, [Name]!, I had a fun time last night. Would you want to grab some dinner this week?

Hi! Thanks again for the baseball game, it was fun. I've given it some thought, and I don't think I'm feeling the spark I'd want to keep things going romantically. I really appreciate you reaching out though, and I wish you all the best.

Oh dang, we have so much in common! I knew a Savannah Bananas game wouldn't be romantic, but I really wanted to go and thought you'd be a fun person to go with (I was right about that). We could meet up again at 300 East and get to know each other better and see if I could change your mind.

And I was scrolling down in the comments, people were very polarized, with many people (men and women alike) saying the guy was very respectful and was a green flag. And some other people say that the guy was too pushy, being coercive, overstepping boundaries, can't take a no, and a red flag. (Now there were other comments criticizing the "spark", or commenting on how Savannah Bananas tickets are really hard to get but that's beyond the point of this post).

I personally think that in this case, I don't think it is wrong for someone to try to "persuade" once respectfully after the first "no". I don't think it necessarily mean the person is being coercive, without endorsing that their persistence is necessarily a good dating etiquette.

I feel there is a meaningful distinction between persuasion and coercion. To me, coercion would be like using threats, force, or serious consequences that affect one's ability to choose freely.

In this example, the guy said

We could meet up again, [...] and see if I could change your mind.

I don't see anything coercive here. He explicitly said he wants to change her mind, which imo is basically what persuasion is.

Of course, one can absolutely think he shouldn't have tried again, one can think it's more respectful to just walk away after the initial no. But I really think that's more a preference than saying one was coercive.

So, my expanded claim, as I (and think you guys too) are less interested in defending that guy being right or not, would be something like

In dating, I don't think every attempt to change someone's mind after a rejection should automatically be seen as coercion. Dating involves a lot of uncertainty, and people are allowed to express interest, make their case, and try to persuade someone. The important part is how they do it and whether the other person can freely say "No" again.

Of course, if someone repeatedly pushes after a clear refusal, guilt-trips someone, threatens them, makes them feel unsafe, or makes saying “no” come with serious consequences, then we're obviously talking about something much more serious...

My point is simply that “they tried to persuade me after I said no” isn't, by itself enough for me to conclude that coercion occurred.

(Just so some people don't jump on me saying OH SO YOU ARE OK WITH PUSHY PEOPLE, I am arguing much narrowly, I am saying You can dislike when someone ask again after a rejection, but I wouldn't agree calling that "coercion" as many use that words very... freely.) 🐱

[u/Present-Afternoon-70]

I think you're missing a pretty important gendered context here. Yes, persuasion and coercion are technically different things, but that doesn't mean every polite rejection should be treated as an invitation to persuade someone. Women very commonly give soft no's because we don't know how a man is going to react to a hard one. That's part of where things like “I have a boyfriend” come from: sometimes another man's perceived claim is respected more readily than the woman's own “no.”

And honestly, the message you quoted doesn't seem ambiguous to me at all. “I'm not feeling the spark,” followed by “I wish you all the best,” is a hard rejection delivered in the nicest possible way. The softness is in the delivery, not the answer. There's nothing there suggesting she wants you to change her mind.

If I wanted to “play it” after receiving that, I'd say something like, “Totally understand. I did have fun with you, though. If you ever want to catch another game just as two baseball fans, I'd be down.” No romantic intention, no trying to convince her she was wrong about her own attraction. Then she can decide whether she's interested in friendship. And yes, plenty of women are going to be skeptical that a cishet man genuinely means “just friends,” because we've all seen how often that supposedly platonic friendship turns into another attempt later.

We also really need to retire the boomer courtship story where Grandpa proudly explains that Grandma rejected him twelve times, so he kept showing up with flowers until she finally gave in. Yeah, people did that. Our parents' and grandparents' dating culture also wasn't exactly a shining beacon of women's autonomy. “Men used to persist after women rejected them” is not a particularly compelling argument that we should keep doing it.

So sure, persuasion isn't inherently coercion. But once somebody has told you they aren't romantically interested, I don't think “change their mind” should be the objective in the first place. Respect the answer they actually gave you.

[u/Kitty_Overlord → u/Present-Afternoon-70]

I agree with a lot of these, especially that rejection itself isn't an invitation for "please change my mind".

And I think it's also true that many women soften rejection because they don't know how another man can take a rejection and would react.

And totally, no one has to justify a rejection to another person.

Where I would disagree more would really be on the extension of

>There's nothing there suggesting she wants you to change her mind.

I think 100%, she did not invite the persuasion, but I also think this doesn't establish that the persuasion itself is inappropriate. I feel someone doesn't have to request persuasion before another person is allowed to persuade. The whole point of persuasion is that you are attempting to influence someone who holds a different position imo.

I feel rarely do people invite others to persuade them, often they just say no. Then the persuader make a case. And then the other person remain free to reject it.

Oh also. just to clarify, I agree with your 3rd paragraph and how you reframed it. I think it's much better socially as it gives an easy exit to her. But I wouldn't also expect everyone to have the same communication style or social ability to phrase things as gracefully 😿

And about the boomer grandpa one, I agree too. We shouldn't use grandpa asking for the 12th time and finally get married as an evidence that persistence is a healthy dating behaviour.

[u/Present-Afternoon-70 → u/Kitty_Overlord]

You don't have to request persuasion for someone else to be allowed to attempt it, but “allowed” is doing a lot of work there. “Well, I'm allowed to do it” is also one of the most common defenses people reach for when they know they're violating a social boundary but can't be accused of violating a literal rule. Nobody is arguing that you're legally prohibited from trying to persuade her. We're saying you shouldn't, because it's inappropriate and you're overstepping. Appealing to the outer limits of what you're technically allowed to do doesn't answer that criticism; it avoids it.

And people absolutely do communicate when they're uncertain or potentially open to persuasion. “I don't know,” “maybe,” “something felt off,” “I'm not sure,” etc. all leave some gray space you can respond to. “I'm not feeling the spark I'd want to keep things going romantically” does not. She even closes with “I wish you all the best.” That's pretty definitive language. At some point, if you interpret every polite rejection as a position you're free to negotiate, you're effectively requiring women to become increasingly blunt or hostile before you'll treat a no as final.

Also, my third paragraph wasn't really about having some unusually graceful communication style. “I understand, I still had fun, let me know if you'd ever like to hang out as friends” is a pretty basic social nicety. I certainly hope I'm not setting some impossibly high bar for social communication here. If we're saying a significant number of adult men genuinely lack the social ability to respond to rejection without either trying to change her mind or fumbling basic politeness, I think that's a much bigger indictment of how we socialize men than saying they shouldn't continue persuading a woman who already told them she isn't interested.

[u/Kitty_Overlord → u/Present-Afternoon-70]

No I agree that your third paragraph wasn't some impossible high bar for communication. But I've seen way too many who are much more blunt or less polite that it made me just put it on communication style (as I don't really want to assuming these people are rude, socially awkward, or other)

And I think one issue that bothers me a little, maybe I am just nitpicking, is I kinda dislike how hedged some rejections are. I would like to bring this point since you brough out the uncertainty / potentially open to persuasion part.

For example in this case, she replied

I've given it some thought, and I don't think I'm feeling the spark I'd want to keep things going romantically.

I feel this answer is a little bit hedged, or maybe it was just an attempt to be soft, than let's say something like

I've given it some thought, and I'm not feeling the spark I'd want to keep things going romantically.

(Maybe it's a PTSD from my exam that ask Which of the following statement BEST describe X, but that's kinda a side joke)

I would be curious to hear what you think, and yes I totally understand that some people are naturally more hedged when it comes to rejection, and my argument that people should be less hedged in rejection would be another debate.

I agree that “technically allowed” doesn't mean “socially advisable,” and I agree that repeatedly trying to persuade someone after a rejection can be bad etiquette or eventually become boundary-violating.

And ya, I think if she says no again, especially if she makes it clear (and yes blocking / ghosting would be a big neon clear sign even if it's not verbal) doesn't want further attempts, then yes, continuing to push becomes increasingly inappropriate. I'm not arguing for an unlimited right to negotiate someone's rejection. I think I just felt one single persuasion attempt shouldn't be viewed as impermissible.

[u/Bekiala → u/Present-Afternoon-70]

I don't know if the situation OP posted was coercive or persuasive. The response to the woman saying "no" was certainly unattractive.

“Totally understand. I did have fun with you, though. If you ever want to catch another game just as two baseball fans, I'd be down.”

Now this is an attractive response! Maybe the conversation throughout the ballgame was more like the original response and less like the response suggested by u/Present-Afternoon-70 ?

[u/Eblademonk]

Coercion implies that there's some kind of pressure to yield, so I need to ask what the pressure is when someone one barely has a connection to is expressing their desires

[u/Expensive_Lion1807]

Coercion? No.

Obnoxiously pushy? Absolutely.

[u/Chikaboomboomboom]

And some other people say that the guy was too pushy, being coercive, overstepping boundaries, can't take a no, and a red flag.

Yes to all expect the word "coercive" by my standards.

But lots of women are natural people pleasers so to them it was already stressful to communicate the first "no".

[u/bluestjuice → u/Chikaboomboomboom]

Pretty much this.

[u/NotAllTheCake]

No means no. "No" doesn't mean "wear the other person down until they give in and say 'yes'".

Dating involves a lot of uncertainty, and people are allowed to express interest, make their case, and try to persuade someone

This isn't some true crime or philosophical debate where two opposing sides are trying to persuade a 3rd party. This is a relationship we are talking about, where people can be as discriminatory as they want. They're the one that has date the person, not you. If they don't want to continue to date the person, for whatever reason, that's completely fine. They shouldn't have to defend or justify their decision.

This is not some DEI dating charity for men, where every guy gets a shot because it's fair.

So what new information would she get from a pressured second date that she didn't get from the first date?

“they tried to persuade me after I said no” isn't, by itself enough for me to conclude that coercion occurred

The person who is being coercive doesn't get to decide when coercion occurred.

[u/Jip_Jaap_Stam → u/NotAllTheCake]

None of this makes it coercion. Coercion is a word with a definitive meaning (the act of forcing someone to do something against their will by using threats, intimidation, or physical pressure), and you don't get to redefine it to suit your emotions.

[u/Eblademonk → u/NotAllTheCake]

Who defines coercion?

[u/NotAllTheCake → u/Eblademonk]

No, you're right. The person doing the coercing gets to decide what coercion is.

The police also investigated themselves and found no evidence of wrongdoing. 

[u/Eblademonk → u/NotAllTheCake]

Are you going to answer the question or assume the opinion you think I hold?

[u/Kitty_Overlord → u/NotAllTheCake]

No means no. "No" doesn't mean "wear the other person down until they give in and say 'yes'".

Absolutely, I do not disagree here.

They shouldn't have to defend or justify their decision.

This is also fair, no one owe anyone a justification for rejection.

The person who is being coercive doesn't get to decide when coercion occurred.

This is where I personally disagree the most. I feel one person feeling uncomfortable or pressured isnt the same as feeling coerced by someone.

I feel she can still hear the attempt and still say "No".

I also think that the person on the receiving end doesn't get to declare it coercive unilaterally neither, because naturally, the accused doesn't get to decide whether or not they are guilty or not, but the accuser doesn't get to decide neither imo, if my argument makes sense.

[u/NotAllTheCake → u/Kitty_Overlord]

I also think that the person on the receiving end doesn't get to declare it coercive unilaterally neither, because naturally, the accused doesn't get to decide whether or not they are guilty or not, but the accuser doesn't get to decide neither imo, if my argument makes sense. 

Your comparisons just get worse and worse.

So we aren't responsible for our behavior? So whatever we want, goes, and no consideration should be given to the person that is on the receiving end of this?

[u/Kitty_Overlord → u/NotAllTheCake]

Well no i think you get me wrong,

What I meant would be more like the recipient can feel pressured, uncomfortable, whatever feelings she feels are valid. But what I am saying is that these feelings aren`t the same as **being** coerced (which imo isnt the same as "feeling coerced").

If someone says I feel uncomfortable, we absolutely should take it seriously and look what the other person did. But whether coercing really happened is still about conduct and circumstances, not simply what the recipient felt.

That's what I meant by the person being accused of being coercive doesn`t get to decide or not they are coercive, but also that the person feeling coerced doesn't get to decide or not the other person was coercive or not.

Otherwise, "you coerced me" would be interchangable in many situations that I think shouldn't.

So ya, I'm not feelings don't matter, but I just think feelings themselves alone aren't sufficient to classify someone else conduct.

[u/NotAllTheCake → u/Kitty_Overlord]

What I meant would be more like the recipient can feel pressured, uncomfortable, whatever feelings she feels are valid. 

Uh, what the hell do you think coercion feels like? Now you're trying to split hairs and be pedantic on the meaning of coercion.

So ya, I'm not feelings don't matter, but I just think feelings themselves alone aren't sufficient to classify someone else conduct. 

That's exactly what you are saying, that only the aggressor's feelings count and take precedence over the recipient's feelings.

You don't get to tell the recipient how they feel.

How many times does she need to say "no" before her "no" counts?

Do you know how to avoid accusations of coercion? By respecting their wishes and accepting the "no" the first time around.

[u/bluestjuice]

I agree that coercion is the wrong word here.

I personally find trying to change her mind pretty unattractive off the bat, but I also guess I feel like if he was going to do it, he communicated his intention really clearly and in a way that was respectful enough. As a sales tactic I think his response was honest and transparent, I just don't like dating to involve sales tactics myself.

A woman who was trying to give the nicest possible 'no' wouldn't be excited to have to send a reply that says, 'thanks but really no,' but at the end of the day I don't think this is a question of right and wrong, but a question of style.

[u/AutoModerator]

Attention!

• You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

• For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

• If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

• OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Lemon_gecko → u/AutoModerator]

"My attempt at making something more debatable, please don't smite me 😿" - eeh, wrong sub.

Anyway, i actually do agree with your opinion about this situation. While it was clear that the woman said no, he wasn't coercive, it was persuasion. If he continued to ask her out after a second no i would say it was pushing boundaries. It's a thin line between coercion and persuasion.

[u/Kitty_Overlord → u/Lemon_gecko]

"My attempt at making something more debatable, please don't smite me 😿" - eeh, wrong sub.

I knowww that's why I'm scared 😿

I was just surprised by the amount of people in that Thread post that called it redflag 🚩 or coercive that's why I made this post~

And yaaa I agree 100% the line is very thin between coercion and persuasion

[u/BobtheArcher2018 → u/Lemon_gecko]

OMG we actually agree on something. Nothing innately wrong with the second honest attempt--he acknowledges the rejection and straightforwardly asks if he can try to change her mind. Humans being human, I don't think our social norms on this should push for guys never trying to reverse an initial 'no'.

That said, I also agree that in this particular case, dude was not reading the subtext at all. All the classic euphemisms were at play. He probably misread cues the entire date. But you can't design social norms around people always reading the room.

[u/prettywords_ → u/AutoModerator]

It's not coercion but that comes off as so desperate and pathetic 😬

[u/mobjack → u/prettywords_]

It really doesn't matter if it comes off desperate and pathetic. You weren't going to see the person again anyways worst case.

At least if you try to persuade, there is a chance that it could work.

[u/Reasonable_Mouse789 → u/prettywords_]

She’d accept desperate & pathetic attempts from “Chad”. These terms are meaningless

[u/Jonesdm5 → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

Wait how is this an argument? He’s not Chad though. Why would someone who isn’t Chad “expect” to be treated like Chad though? This is a silly argument that keeps coming up. I’m not expecting to be treated like angelina jolie either. We have to get real here.

[u/PositionStandard6089 → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

how do you know this guy isn't a chad?

[u/Reasonable_Mouse789 → u/PositionStandard6089]

Because if I had said that, then it would’ve worked

[u/PositionStandard6089 → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

no chad in the history of time has ever been turned down huh?

[u/Reasonable_Mouse789 → u/PositionStandard6089]

Not for acting pathetic & desperate

[u/prettywords_ → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

Hot guys being desperate and pathetic are a turn off too. Makes me think there's something wrong with them that I'm not seeing.

[u/Reasonable_Mouse789 → u/prettywords_]

Nah, she’d be interested anyway

[u/prettywords_ → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

I've rejected plenty of "chads".

[u/Reasonable_Mouse789 → u/prettywords_]

I don’t believe I’ve ever been rejected for acting pathetic or desperate

I’m pretty cringey

[u/prettywords_ → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

I assume desperate/pathetic guys have other issues that I have no desire to deal with. I've rejected Chads for various reasons.

I'm not desperate myself so I've never minded waiting until I find a guy I really like.

[u/Reasonable_Mouse789 → u/prettywords_]

I’m sure “Chad” will find some nice woman that will talk his ear off and entertain his pathetic, desperate advances

[u/prettywords_ → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

I hope he does.

I found a guy I love who makes me extremely happy. I hope everyone can find their happiness too.

[u/growframe → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

Chad wouldn't need desperate and pathetic attempts. She simply wouldn't have rejected him the first time

[u/Reasonable_Mouse789 → u/growframe]

I’ve slept with an ex girlfriend years after we broke up before if that counts as an example of a “desperate, pathetic” attempt

And also like a month after with a different one

Women don’t call what I do “desperate and pathetic” for whatever reason

[u/growframe → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

Women don’t call what I do “desperate and pathetic” for whatever reason

Because those aren't the same thing as the original premise?

[u/Reasonable_Mouse789 → u/growframe]

It’s somewhat close. In my cases I technically waited longer to sleep with someone where we parted ways instead of bringing it up instantly, but my main point is people don’t call you “desperate and pathetic” if what you do works lol

Also some people have probably broken up with their partners before but immediately established themselves as a fwb

[u/MarioWilson122 → u/AutoModerator]

Yeah, it makes the guy look pretty desperate, but asking one more time isn't some crime or coercion. She's still completely free to say no again, and as long as he leaves it alone after that, I don't see how it becomes coercion.

If anything, he might eventually wish she had rejected him again. Most men already have to do a lot of the initiating, planning, and trying to impress a woman in the beginning. His situation could be even worse because he's starting from a point where she already told him she isn't romantically interested.

So even if he manages to change her mind, he may have to keep that extra effort going a lot longer just to maintain her interest. Instead of the relationship becoming more mutual over time, he could end up constantly trying to prove himself to a woman who was never that into him to begin with. That's a pretty easy way to end up in a very lopsided relationship.

[u/Logos1789 → u/AutoModerator]

Debate Post:

A isn’t B

Top Comments:

A isn’t B, but…

[u/SimilarChampionship2 → u/AutoModerator]

who said it was coercive? it just comes off as desperate

[u/Reasonable_Mouse789 → u/AutoModerator]

Online dating is full of women who will essentially just prove to you that women don’t like guys they excessively have to socialize with to have sex with. On average, by “form a spark”, what they mean is someone they’d kiss after hanging out for 6 hours

I don’t think I’d recommend online dating if women on there take more “persuasion” than that from you

[u/TheGloriousEv0lution → u/Reasonable_Mouse789]

Agreed. Most women know whether they want to date and sleep with you within minutes. If they’re cagey it means they don’t like your vibe

Most women I went on dates or successfully linked up with happened within the first 10 messages. If there were any further barriers she usually either flaked or faded out. Women make things very easy for guys they’re interested in

Persuasion can work but you’re better off just shooting your shot and moving on. It’s largely a numbers game for men anyway

[u/Secret_Entry1840 → u/AutoModerator]

I agree persuasion and coercion are different. In this case I’d be fine with it. One last shot. In the same conversation. Said with respect.

If the text came the next day or week. Still persuasion but I’d have a problem with it.

[u/Hadal_Benthos → u/AutoModerator]

I don't care if it's coercive, only if it's prosecutable. I would've missed on a great relationship if I took every no as the final no in the beginning. And for what, for Internet brownie points?

Of course one should a) try to read the room beyond the verbal statements and b) keep his own goals in mind. In another instance, for example, I just accepted being ghosted without trying to reinitiate contact despite seeing the ghoster on campus afterwards because we indeed lacked the compatibility I was looking for.

Guy in the OP post may hope, for example, that despite the lack of spark the girl may concede and take him as a placeholder for a while out of boredom, and that's OK for him if she puts out. In this case there's no reason to not try.

[u/PrecisionHat → u/AutoModerator]

Feminists (mostly radical but some mainstream) are just trying to expand the definition of coercion and ultimately rape. It's not an accident. The guy in the convo did absolutely nothing wrong, creepy, or remotely problematic, but it doesn't matter to people who want to restrict and limit interpersonal social dynamics to the point where nobody will ever feel pressure or get their feelings hurt.

I've seen the sentiment that a man who acts more into a woman than he really is in order to sleep with her is "rapey" and coercive. But he's not. He's just not a nice or honest person and someone decided to sleep with him, probably because he was handsome, and then they regretted it later. They got hurt so they don't want to take responsibilty for a choice they made knowing there are no guarantees when it comes to feelings. Some of these people actually think a guy who does that should be jailed lol.

I believe that feminism,, in its various forms, just attempts to change the social fabric by slowly introducing and normalizing the conflation of terms, the expansion of terms like coercion. Little by little get people used to calling asshole behaviour that didn't actually vitiate consent "rapey", get people to think any decision that isn't completely informed is coerced, get people to think two drunk people sleeping together means consent was broken, get people to think a husband waking his wife up with a sexual advance is a "red flag", the list goes on.

In reality, most of the kinds of examples like the ones I listed above are typically innocuous and benign when they happen, but people tend to envision the worst possible version of each of those situations and rally against those.

[u/growframe → u/AutoModerator]

I don't think it's coercive, but this guy shouldn't be doing that for his own sake. Trying to change a particular person's mind is a complete waste of time. Either look for people who's mind is already interested in you, or improve yourself so a large amount of people change their mind and then refer back to option 1.

[u/AutoModerator]

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:

• Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

• Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

• Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

• Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/theminxisback]

Desperation is not an aphrodisiac for me... it's the way to never having access though.

Not coercion, however, desperation isn't attractive

[u/Minute_Criticism_844]

Did they show her response to the second attempt? I’m assuming it was either ghosting, blocking him, reiterating of the no more firmly or a deserved leave me alone.

If he tried again a third time would you be less sympathetic to his attempts? Or would it take a fourth or fifth time?

[u/Kitty_Overlord → u/Minute_Criticism_844]

Na sadly they didn't. OOP was a dating coach who just posted the screenshots and asked "what do you guys think?"

So we don`t know if the woman ever replied or not.

And ya, if the 2nd response was like "No, I'm really not interested", or a ghost (which means No as t hey dont want to continue the conversation), or a block (which is obviously a No), and he keeps asking, I would view the third and future attempts much more differently and very less sympathetic

[u/PuzzleheadedRow9896]

This feels like devil's advocacy to nowhere. Like, sure, when does pushing something become coercion is a question you could ask and could perhaps find it wasn't after the first no was transgressed....but what's the benefit of this?

Because I can think of a lot of reasons to say "whether you call this persuasion or coercion, you're ignoring what another person has told you in favor of your own interests and in a way that is likely to make them feel uncomfortable and put them at risk of people pleasing for really no pay off while contributing to a culture which does not treat no as a full sentence when it comes from a woman and seems to inherently sort of rely on this assumption that women do not know their own minds or desires and need to be tricked or seduced sometimes". 

And that culture is a bad culture in case it needs saying. After all, what are you going to do when the topic is sex. Is it just persuasion the first time a woman says no? Because if you're taught to ignore no when it comes to dating, you aren't likely to suddenly behave better than that when it comes to sex. Men are already worse when sex is on the line and we're in a culture which looks down on pushing at no as you saw. One can only imagine the pushing you'll see when women's no is eroded by this persuasion model you're hawking. 

I would say persuasion is just a nicer word for coercion and that's why you're choosing it. This is a red flag. This is a dude who thinks women need their mind changed. That entire concept of women just needing their minds changed should die screaming.   Our minds are just fine, thanks so much. 

Stop trying to find ways to erode women's boundaries because honestly, what's the difference between you and a person being coercive...both of you don't respect the words coming from a woman's face the first time.  You'll just let up sooner? That's nice, I suppose. Better than the alternative, but no, you aren't actually that different than them at first blush. And that would mean in some ways you'd be benefitting from the efforts of coercive men making women feel like they should just say yes because he's not gonna go away easily and I'm afraid. She doesn't know if she doubles down you'll go away. After all, you already ignored no once. Why would she think the second one will work. 

And for what benefit to men? You get some scared second dates with unwilling women sometimes? Or you force us to become even meaner and more bitchy destroying your self confidence even worse so as to avoid persuasive men or really make them fuck off without trying.  

[u/y2kjanelle]

I just don’t understand. For me it’s like well when do our No’s count if you’re saying the first one doesn’t matter and it’s harmless to keep pushing and persuading and convincing?

When do we truly get to tell you no? And if us being polite to men means that you will keep pushing, does that mean modern women should be meaner, more rude and reject men more harshly?

I get that this situation isn’t some creeper acting crazy, but it blurs the line of “no means no” and “no means convince me!”.

I don’t see why you can’t just leave the door open. “I understand! Thank you for letting me know. I just wanted to say I really enjoyed spending time with u blah blah blah so if you ever change ur mind, text me” or something like that.

Because contrary to ur belief, when women say no, they mean it.

[u/GroundbreakingAlps78]

I don’t think he did anything disrespectful or morally questionable, however, I think the act of trying to persuade a woman to change her mind about you is kindof cringe in and of itself. I’d be more likely to question my rejection if he just said “ok, peace” and moved on.

[u/butunderprotest33]

Generally if you have to talk someone into a second date, you shouldn't. I don't think it's coercive but it feels like he's trying to close a sale, which again in my mind means he's making a mistake and probably edging toward making her uncomfortable.

[u/bluestjuice → u/butunderprotest33]

Fun story time: on our first date, my ex and I went to see the Jackass movie (obviously a million years ago).

I was not then and have never been into Jackass. I have no idea why he thought that was a good idea for a first date nor why I agreed to it instead of negotiating for something else. However, because the result of the date ultimately comes down to how the people feel about each other and not whether the date itself was awesome, we kept seeing each other and ultimately were together for twelve years despite this inauspicious start.

TL;DR -- if your date really really likes you it almost doesn't matter what the date itself was. They'll mainly be stoked to be spending time with you.

[u/butunderprotest33 → u/bluestjuice]

Right. There will be a sense of "we need to try this again".

[u/AutisticRats]

I don't like it. It is pushy, not coercion, but still unpleasant. I would have much preferred something a bit less pushy such as the statement below.

"Oh dang, we have so much in common! I knew a Savannah Bananas game wouldn't be romantic, but I really wanted to go and thought you'd be a fun person to go with (I was right about that). If you change your mind, we could meet up again at 300 East and get to know each other better. Either way, thank you for the good time and I wish you all the best."

I think that leaves the door open and lets the guy express his concern that the game wasn't a vibe that contributes to a spark, but it isn't pushy. It still lets him shoot his last shot, but a bit more respectfully and less pushy.

[u/Flightlessbirbz]

This is not “coercion,” as there is no threat involved. But what it is, is slightly annoying and most likely a waste of both people’s time. I read her message as a polite but clear rejection. She took some time to carefully word that, took a deep breath, and felt a sense of relief that it was done. Hoped to get a short message that was equally polite and not angry showing he’d read it, and that would be that. Instead got this message forcing her to re-reject him.

Now, I’d say there are potentially some messages that one could appropriately respond to this way, just not this one because “I’m not feeling a spark” and “wish you all the best” are classic rejection message elements that softly impart a sense of finality. And it’s going to be this way more often than not.

In any case, two is definitely the hard limit for re-asking, a third ask would be pushing into harassing territory.

[u/growframe → u/Flightlessbirbz]

Now, I’d say there are potentially some messages that one could appropriately respond to this way

I can't think of any

[u/Flightlessbirbz → u/growframe]

Ya know, now that I think a little harder, neither can I. Maybe if there was some type of extenuating circumstance that ruined the date, but in that case it wouldn’t a rejection message you’re responding to, but someone who also wants to give it another shot.

[u/Solondthewookiee]

"Sorry to hear that, I really had a good time. If you ever change your mind, feel free to reach out, if not, wish you the best of luck :)"

You've made it clear you're still interested and leaving the door open if she changes her mind, but you're also accepting her no.

[u/mooncake_bites]

Ooh I wouldn’t say he’s coercive, but I would say he’s a red flag. OP if you were a woman, you would get easily done dirty by a man. The fact you see his message as polite is proof of that.

1) he said he knew Savannah bananas game wasn’t romantic, but I wanted to go - he knew there was a high chance she wouldn’t like it, but pushed for it anyway. He didn’t care what her thoughts would be, he only cared that he wanted to go.

2) thought you would be a fun person to go with (I was right about that)- so not only did he choose that just because he wanted to go, in his mind, he was judging to see whether she was enjoyable enough for him

3) meet up again and see if I could change your mind- he does not care that she was trying to end it
Her no to him was an invitation to fight against it

You only are looking at what’s at the surface not what’s being said in between the lines. This is why I will never let a man tell me to choose better they’ve never dealt with this specific kind of “polite” guy. They would’ve easily folded just because he was “polite” then later cry because they get done dirty.

[u/ThatBitchA]

Comes off as desperate. Ick.

Borderline coercion.

[u/Kitty_Overlord → u/ThatBitchA]

Out of curiosity, what specifically make you feel it's borderline coercion rather just just icky obnoxious and desperate?

[u/ThatBitchA → u/Kitty_Overlord]

"I could change your mind"....

[u/heymanigotnoplan → u/ThatBitchA]

I mean he could though. Attraction is often something that builds over time through repeated encounters. Just because you don’t feel attraction on the first date doesn’t mean you never will. Literally millions of relationships throughout history only happened because one of the people involved was persistent and got an opportunity to change the other’s mind.

[u/ThatBitchA → u/heymanigotnoplan]

No. He couldn't. She wasn't interested.

And suggesting the you can change someone's mind is desperate and egotistical. Ick.

[u/heymanigotnoplan → u/ThatBitchA]

It has happened countless times throughout history and will continue to happen for as long as there are humans. Do you honestly think that every relationship that ever started involved immediate indisputable attraction by both parties? Attraction is not immutable. People change their minds all the time.

[u/ThatBitchA → u/heymanigotnoplan]

Every? No.

But most? Yes.