[avmich]

> I also believe that the "advancer" needs to understand that the consequences you've outlined are a real chance and they need to be okay with those consequences before making an advance.

What you'd do if you're not okay with those consequences?

[UPnorth1234]

Not make the advance? I don't know what you're suggesting, but I don't think trying to shift the blame onto the recepient of an advance is the right move, regardless if it is a man or a woman.

There are certainly ways to mitigate the chance of one of those consequences happening, i.e. taking the time to see if there are mutual feelings between you and the other person instead of shooting a shot without any sort of idea if the feeling is reciprocated or not.

[avmich]

> IMHO saying no (ie declining an offer or advance) should not qualify as "unpleasant"

> Not make the advance?

So people should carefully avoid certain topics, lest them suggest an advance which could backfire spectacularly? Otherwise how'd they know if some phrase they too carelessly dropped will cause those responses which they should realize could happen?

> I don't know what you're suggesting, but I don't think trying to shift the blame onto the recepient of an advance is the right move, regardless if it is a man or a woman.

I think it's a intentionally complex interaction, and, unfortunately, the recipient can't be completely blameless no matter what he/she does. In other words, we shouldn't oversimplify here, life, and this particular facet of it, is quite more complex than we're modeling here.

> There are certainly ways to mitigate the chance of one of those consequences happening, i.e. taking the time to see if there are mutual feelings between you and the other person instead of shooting a shot without any sort of idea if the feeling is reciprocated or not.

That also begs questions about how to do that at all, how to do that reliably, what unexpected drawbacks this approach brings to all involved parties, and what to do in practice. Don't want to ask them all here, as this discussion is clearly longer than HN can allow. My conclusion is the same: the opinion at the beginning is a sort of oversimplifaction, and doesn't do the justice to the complexity of this problem.

Edit: sorry for oversimplification on my side too.