A
male
age
41-50,
*ohnisBlind
writes:If you were chilling with a guy and he looked at your breasts for any amount of time would you not want to date him? I wish I knew these sorts of things intuitively without having to ask people. I have been diagnosed with Asperger syndrome by at least one doctor but I feel like that is a very limited and reductive way of describing a person. I also haven't really hung out with very many females. I guess the answer to this question is like the answer to most questions like this - such as questions about sex or nuanced social situations. It depends on the context and a lot of subtleties which can't be described easily but I could really appreciate and make use of some intelligent answers. Thank you.
View related questions:
breasts Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
reader, anonymous, writes (12 January 2012): Dude, you are no victim. So stop that.
Like we can foresee we really had this big of an issue when it came to communication barrier.
Ease up. Take the advice. Its all good.
A
female
reader, CindyCares  +, writes (11 January 2012):
 Because you ask for an over simplification that's hard to apply to all things human. Non verbal communication is not mathematics.
The 1. 2. 3 rule is , by and large, an excellent rule - but maybe is more of a guideline than an iron clad rule like the one you are looking for.
Why ? Because, alas, there are many other variables involved that unluckily you can't grasp intuitively or by imitation as most people do. Like, the amount of intensity and concentration when you look. If you keep talking and keep the conversation going without skipping a beat, probably your gaze can rest even a tad more before becoming intrusive, on the other end if you stop dead on your tracks and just look, even a count of 3 may feel embarassing.
Or, facial expression; while you are doing your looking, the flow and mobility of your facial expressions should not change, and we are really talking here about micro movements , a lifted eyebrow, the curl of a lip corner,...if we should talk about measurements, it would probably be millimeters or less, and yet if they miss , your look gets too intense and makes people uneasy even if it does not last long.
Or , the distance- if the person is ,say, two feet away from you , you can look longer, or she will take more to notice, which comes to be the same thing, - if you are just next to her, rubbing elbows, you'd probably give her the creeps even before 3.
I think that in case you asked this question in reference to some lady that you want to ask out or impress favourably, your safer bet would be not to look at her breasts at all, since you are not sure you can master the skills to do it the " right " way, and since these skills can hardly be taught from a distance and reduced to universal theory on a love advice site.
There's no shame in having a disability and accepting that it carries limitations. In your case one of the limitations would be not looking at ( or glancing gazing staring ,... whatever ) women's breasts and frankly it does not sound so severe or so damaging for your quality of life.
...............................
A
female
reader, chigirl  +, writes (11 January 2012):
 You have to make clear what you want to ask. But to me it seems you asked, and you got your answers. What you must understand is that there is nothing wrong with the answers you have gotten. You should not dismiss them because you believe they are based on false assumption. When you ask a general question you will receive general answers. From these answers you then pick and choose what fits for you in your case. No one here has assumed you are staring or have a problem with staring. That is an assumption you make. What we have said however is that IF you were to stare, or thought to stare, then this would be rude. As long as you do not stare then it is not rude. That answer isn't assuming you stare. That answer, in addition with other answers, are to help you distinguish between what constitutes as staring or not, and also what responses your actions will receive. If you a) stare, you will be looked upon as rudeIf you b) only take a quick glance then it is okay.If you c) look for 3 seconds only you should get byNow you are the one who decides which option works for you, and rather than pick at the answers you get and declare we are all making assumption, and leading the discussion off tracks, you should simply make your choice about what option you feel works best for you. Do not take everything to heart. Realize, on your part, that people do not know you, hence what we think or say does not matter. You are the one who knows what goes on, we don't. But we don't need to be told this, and it doesn't become less true if you don't point it out. Accept that these are the answers you have gotten without nitpicking at them. If you haven't, amongst all these answers, gotten your question answered, then try to formulate it again. Because I feel it still isn't clear what it is you are asking. Then I will ask you questions: how important is this really? Why do you need to know? Why do you need to know down to the tiniest little detail how or what to do and not to do? Will your life change if you find the perfect answer? Can you get by without knowing exactly what goes on if you look at breasts for too long (1 second here or 3 seconds there)? Or, can you instead perhaps focus on learning to read the facial expressions of others and judge your own behaviour in accordance to their responses? The world does not end should you happen to look for too long without intention. Are these women you hope to date, or women in your family, or random strangers? And why the need to look in the first place? If you feel it brings so many complications with it then avoid looking in the first place and the entire problem will vanish.
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie + ♥, writes (11 January 2012):
 http://psychology.about.com/od/nonverbalcommunication/tp/nonverbaltips.htm
Check out this link about non-verbal communication, maybe it can give you some tips?
...............................
A
male
reader, JohnisBlind +, writes (11 January 2012):
JohnisBlind is verified as being by the original poster of the questionMaybe the fact that you telling me the 1...2...3.... rule is okay but the tone of voice you imply that maybe it isn't. I feel very put down and yes my feeling are very hurt. Why didn't everybody tell me about the 1...2....3.... rule on the first answer? Why did it take everyone so long to provide such a simple answer?
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (11 January 2012): The Thing about Aspergers is that you are asking of US; the women on the internet, how to teach you societal norms of behaviour and that is difficult because there is a langauge barrier greater than the norm that has to be overcome.
Even then, its something you have to be 'trained' in. Its life that teaches but harder for one of your ability which differs to what we know and understand.
I think its best to befriend a female or approach a couple you know and ask them the HOW TOs: of dating.
Look at the miscommunication and misunderstanding that went one, even when I knew what you were asking, you still took offense when none was intended.
I was just relating to you.
...............................
A
male
reader, JohnisBlind +, writes (11 January 2012):
JohnisBlind is verified as being by the original poster of the questionI feel like I wrote the wrong question and this whole discussion has gone the wrong way. Since half of the answers were wrongly dedicated to the presumption that I have a problem with staring a women's breasts. There is no way to explain how everyone presumed that I have a problem with staring at women's breasts unless it was somehow my own fault and I communicated my question badly. I am sorry I am such a bad communicator. I would have like to ask more questions that have more nuance, but the discussion has already fizzled out. I wander how if anybody could give me a tip on how to ask this question so I can repost it and then have a discussion without all the negative and draining energy that is obviously taking place in this conversation? For example, I would like to ask about the three second rule for instance because in my experience there have been few situations in my life where 3 seconds would seem acceptable, that just seems too long. (Actually most of my life I don't glance at all unless she is absolutely not looking in my direction.) But understand that I am not disagreeing with the three second rule but I am only questioning it so I can understand it. Nuance and anything to do with nuance requires some degree of calmness and clarity of discourse. Thank you very much everybody for your patience, concern, compassion and effort in answering my questions, I just hope that it doesn't end here and somebody can tell me a better way to phrase the question, that way I can ask it again without all the draining, enervating and negative vibrations.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (11 January 2012): I have a son who is an Aspie and I adore him! I had to be made aware of Aspergers and have come to realize that a lot of people have been misunderstood because they don't know who or what they face.
I was saying to someone who doesn't know you have Aspergers and does not know about the facial expressions and staring- it could be easily seen as such.
;)
Totally no offense and the 3 second rule was to help you out. So you can practice that and not offending unintentionally.
...............................
A
female
reader, chigirl +, writes (11 January 2012):
The last message from ChaliceOdamnatio was perfectly fine, and not ignorant.
...............................
A
male
reader, JohnisBlind +, writes (11 January 2012):
JohnisBlind is verified as being by the original poster of the questionThat last message from ChaliceOdamnation was very ignorant and contained a lot of incorrect assumptions that help to perpetuate prejudice toward people with disabilities. Let's all get along here and say nice things to each. Okay? Thank you.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (11 January 2012): 3 second rule means you are not a perv. 3 seconds and yes you are an aspie so you are going to take everything literal as that is how your brain processes.
You would come across as untrained and out for sex only from a woman and not about friendship, companionship.
That Aspies also have little to no facial expressions and you tend to stare intently- you could easily get mistaken as a sexual predator and creep out a woman.
Make sense?
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie + ♥, writes (10 January 2012):
It's not yelling on my part just emphasizing - because this is important.
If you took it as yelling, my apologies.
Yes, you can look a pasing glance, 2-3 seconds, more then that and it starts to move into the creepy zone.
...............................
A
male
reader, JohnisBlind +, writes (10 January 2012):
JohnisBlind is verified as being by the original poster of the questionHoneypie wrote:
"
no. I would look a few second and then find something else to look at.
JUST because you can SEE something doesn't mean you have to STARE. I think that is pretty simple. It comes down to what is SOCIALLY accepted. STARING is not."
My response:Honeypie it does not sound like you are saying anything I disagree with. However I feel like you are yelling when you put things in all caps. Please do not yell, it makes me feel uncomfortable. You would even look at a guy who took his shirt off for a few seconds. So it sounds like by extension that you think it would be okay for a guy to look at a woman's breasts so long as was not long enough to constitute staring. So you are in fact saying yes it is okay to look. You are just saying yes in a way that makes me feel like you are yelling at me for some reason and I don't understand why.
...............................
A
female
reader, eyeswideopen +, writes (10 January 2012):
 Honeypie hold your breath for 10 seconds...you have the hiccups. Or try to drink a glass of water upside down.
...............................
A
male
reader, JohnisBlind +, writes (10 January 2012):
JohnisBlind is verified as being by the original poster of the questionChigirl wrote:
"' If you want to have a look you need to look when it isn't as obvious what you are looking at.'
Still confused?"
My response:
NO Chigirl I am not confused anymore. Everybody here is saying that it is okay to look, it just required me asking follow up questions to get to that point.
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie + ♥, writes (10 January 2012):
If a guy wear really tight pants and you can obviously see "everything" - would I stare? No.
If a guy on a hot summer day takes his shirt off, would I stare? no. I would look a few second and then find something else to look at.
JUST because you can SEE something doesn't mean you have to STARE. I think that is pretty simple. It comes down to what is SOCIALLY accepted. STARING is not.
It's normal to look at people, and if we like what we see we might look a few second longer, but it comes down to some vary rudimentary "rules". Staring mean "declaring" something. It's very basic. If you look at cats (yes I am aware that cats and humans are different) but for a cat a stare can mean hostility or a impending attack.
When we look at others ( non-verbal communication
which is a rather basic nature) many often look to the eyes to evaluate the other person. Is that person friendly, hostile, interested, angry, happy, horny. It is unspoken communication. Staring at a women's chest can easily be perceived as disrespect. Many women will assume that 1. you have no manners, 2. you have no respect for women and just see them as a piece of meat, 3. you are immature.
People who can't look another person in the eyes when talking (and I don't mean stare) can be perceived as lacking confidence, or sometimes can even seem like you lack interest.
Be mindful of your actions and be sure to avoid staring blankly at others or you'll seem odd at best, creepy at worst. That would include staring at a woman's chest.
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie + ♥, writes (10 January 2012):
If a guy wear really tight pants and you can obviously see "everything" - would I stare? No.
If a guy on a hot summer day takes his shirt off, would I stare? no. I would look a few second and then find something else to look at.
JUST because you can SEE something doesn't mean you have to STARE. I think that is pretty simple. It comes down to what is SOCIALLY accepted. STARING is not.
It's normal to look at people, and if we like what we see we might look a few second longer, but it comes down to some vary rudimentary "rules". Staring mean "declaring" something. It's very basic. If you look at cats (yes I am aware that cats and humans are different) but for a cat a stare can mean hostility or a impending attack.
When we look at others ( non-verbal communication
which is a rather basic nature) many often look to the eyes to evaluate the other person. Is that person friendly, hostile, interested, angry, happy, horny. It is unspoken communication. Staring at a women's chest can easily be perceived as disrespect. Many women will assume that 1. you have no manners, 2. you have no respect for women and just see them as a piece of meat, 3. you are immature.
People who can't look another person in the eyes when talking (and I don't mean stare) can be perceived as lacking confidence, or sometimes can even seem like you lack interest.
Be mindful of your actions and be sure to avoid staring blankly at others or you'll seem odd at best, creepy at worst. That would include staring at a woman's chest.
...............................
A
male
reader, JohnisBlind +, writes (10 January 2012):
JohnisBlind is verified as being by the original poster of the questionHi, Cindycares. Remember that the question is whether or not it's okay to look at all.
You wrote:
"So...Women also show their hair....Do you think it is OK fixing these body parts intently ? Focusing on them ? For more than seconds"
My response:
No, I did not in fact say that I thought that it was okay to look at breasts for more than seconds because some women show them. That is misconstruing what I said. Remember that I actually was only asking if it was okay to look at all.
It seems to me that you are implying that it is okay to look at a woman's hair so long as you don't look at it for "seconds". It also sounds like you don't even disagree with me. If it's okay to look at a woman's attractive hair so long as it is less that seconds then maybe women show their breasts so that men can look for less than seconds.
Maybe I am just being too logical and literal?
...............................
A
female
reader, CindyCares +, writes (10 January 2012):
So ? Women also show their hair. Some time very long ,flowing hair . Or accurately made up faces. Or hands with accurately manicured nails.
Do you think it is OK fixing these body parts intently ? Focusing on them ? For more than seconds ? Long enough that the women , or other people around, notice you are staring at these parts ? Think again.
It is annoying, creepy, and vaguely threatening .
Of course people ( including men ) like to be SEEN- seen as in aknowledged and even admired. A rapid , casual , relaxed glance says just that : I admire you. MORE than that sends a different, invasive, sexually overcharged message.
...............................
A
female
reader, chigirl +, writes (10 January 2012):
"Everyone takes in the other person when they meet or talk, by looking them over and noticing what they are wearing or how they look. So that part is normal."
" If you want to have a look you need to look when it isn't as obvious what you are looking at."
Still confused?
You didn't ask if it is okay to look for any amount of time at a cleavage that is out there in the open. You asked if it was okay to look at a womans chest. Just because some women occasionally wear shirts with cleavages doesn't mean you are to stare at everyone else. Have a quick glance like I said, but don't let it be obvious that you've had a look. Women wear cleavages to look attractive, not because they want a man to only look at her breasts constantly. Staring or fixating at breasts IS rude, no matter the shirt or showing off of cleavage.
Why is this still confusing to you? Staring us rude, cleavage or no cleavage. Taking in a glance is okay. Staring isn't. There's nothing else to be confused about.
I admit that when a woman has enormous breasts and they sort of pop out in your face it is difficult not to stare because they are so out there. But even in that situation it IS rude. Look away. Doesn't matter if the woman looks vulgar. You aren't to stare at her.
...............................
A
male
reader, JohnisBlind +, writes (10 January 2012):
JohnisBlind is verified as being by the original poster of the questionYou asked me: "As of the moment all you ask is if it os ok to look at her chest. No, it is not okay. What part of that is confusing to you?"
Well one thing that would be confusing to me is that women often show cleavage. On a logical level cleavage seems to be an acknowledgment that breasts are attractive. Do you ever show cleavage?
...............................
A
female
reader, chigirl +, writes (10 January 2012):
You are not appreciating the answers you get, for some reason. We are only answering your question, and men and women alike can give answers on this site. We are also telling you how we feel about staring, looks or glances all the same. If these answers do not answer your question then you need to be much more specific in your question.
As of the moment all you ask is if it os ok to look at her chest. No, it is not okay. What part of that is confusing to you? People (women) feel grossed out by a guy that looks/stares at her chest (if she notices it that is). We don't like it. Does that answer your question now?
Look at her nose if you can't face the eyes.
...............................
A
female
reader, CindyCares +, writes (10 January 2012):
Sorry I see now you mention " less than staring ". Anything that draws the attention of the glanced one on your glances is staring. You don't need to avert your looks or close your eyes, that would be strange too. But when you are in conversation with people normally you look at their faces, not their chests.
...............................
A
female
reader, CindyCares +, writes (10 January 2012):
There's not much difference between the act of staring per se and the feelings it elicits .
It is rude, ERGO it is offensive and disturbing as any unwarranted break of boundiaries.
In simpler words, yes, most women would think you're a creep or a jerk.
...............................
A
male
reader, JohnisBlind +, writes (10 January 2012):
JohnisBlind is verified as being by the original poster of the questionMost of the answers here respond to the question as if I was asking about the appropriateness of staring. And that seems more obvious to me than peoples feelings on less than staring which is a much more confusing subject matter.
...............................
A
male
reader, JohnisBlind +, writes (9 January 2012):
JohnisBlind is verified as being by the original poster of the questionTrancedRhythmEar: Well wouldn't women be better suited to answer questions about what women want? Not that I don't appreciate as much input as possible.
...............................
A
male
reader, TrancedRhythmEar  +, writes (9 January 2012):
 Women dont mind a glance during convo but repeated stares can be creepy as it comes across as very aggressive which isnt an impression a lot of women like. Dont be embarrassed. Shit ive been caught many times and when i do i make some sarcastic remark or tease them. I dont compliment. Best to you medically pal.
...............................
A
female
reader, chigirl +, writes (9 January 2012):
"Looking for any amount of time" can become staring. If you want to have a look you need to look when it isn't as obvious what you are looking at. Everyone takes in the other person when they meet or talk, by looking them over and noticing what they are wearing or how they look. So that part is normal. But fixating on the breasts is rude. Catching a brief glimpse is natural for anyone to do.
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie + ♥, writes (8 January 2012):
It depends if that was the only thing he stared at. Did he follow the conversation or was he "hypnotized" by my chest?
You know what I mean?
You could talk to the girl and tell her, that you don't mean to be rude, but you have a habit of staring.
If you can't look her in the eyes, look at her nose, not her chest. After all they are only boobs,they don't really do anything and they won't talk back to you.
...............................
A
female
reader, chigirl +, writes (8 January 2012):
It's not a dealbreaker. But it will lower your chances, yes. It is rude to stare at a womans breasts, especially if you are talking to her... You should look into her eyes. If you stare it'll make you look like a boob-fixated man who has no interest in anything but her breasts. Women don't want to date a man who is only interested in her for her breasts, naturally.
...............................
|
