Helpful/Friendly Senior Turned Over-friendly 22

[mizzjoey]

Hi everyone.

I kind of have an awkward situation right now. Don't know if I actually have a situation or I should just loosen up, in fact.

I'm close to one senior engineer from a previous job; he was very helpful when I was working with him previously and we're both working our postgraduate thesis at the same faculty on part time basis. So now I see him every weekend at the lab for discussion with our two lecturers. And of course we're in the same industry and him being very knowledgeable makes him a useful contact.

I used to be okay with him because he was sort of a big brother to me. He's about 15 yrs my senior, married and I'm on great terms with his lovely wife. But lately he's being a bit too friendly and eventhough I said no to his outing invitations all the time he just doesn't notice that he's making me uncomfortable. I doubt he's being like this on purpose; he's a bit on the geeky and socially-awkward side.

Say you're the senior engineer, how would you like to be gently explained that your junior would like you to stop asking her to hang out on weekends?

At least, I'd like him to stop asking me out for a swim everytime we finish lab... I told him every single time that I don't find the idea of looking at him in skimpy spandex particularly appealing, but he would just say that's because I haven't seen how good he looks in them.

Plus he's been asking me out for a movie lately, and the last time was half an hour ago in an email.

Maybe I should stop being a prude?
jo

 

[jmw]

Oh Cass, illussions gone.

Yeah, I didn't get anywhere, except that I've laid the groundwork for my next request around the same issue.

Here you are setting up SO for the list method for routine arguments; (an argument is when one or both get to the raised voices stage, before then is the honeymoon period) and poor SO will find fattening foods at the top of the list every time... and even once he has learned his lesson and feeds you lettuce and Kiwi fruit, you'll still remind him of it for, oh, let's say, the next 11 years (based on personal experience of my own SO so far - er, that's how long we've been married so I don't know if there is a cut-off point).

But I really did like the teacher - idiot child routine:

"Do you remember our conversation from the last time?"

My wife is never that patient, she just lays into me.
Of course, we here at Eng-Tips realise that this is a relatively new SO and you are house training him carefully. However, if this is how you really do intend to go on, without anger, shouting or throwing a fit (I can live with sarcasm and the teacher - idiot child routine a lot more easily that keep having to duck flower-pots), then I guess I'd better follow that link to your NVC training course.
But is it me who should take it or the wife?
(PS, an emoticon would have allowed Kenat some respite from the ribbing)



JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[casseopeia]

jmw, I'm not sure what illusion I've shattered. What were you thinking, that I was the love child of Ghandi and Mother Teresa? Seriously, by groundwork I mean that I have tried to address these things before it gets bad. I'm not anywhere close to being consistent with that either.

I’ve actually had better success with a different issue. It’s just that that situation didn’t lend itself into a nice little compact NVC ‘scene’. My SO has a habit of complaining about the tiniest little things and his 4 yo daughter will do it as well. When they get rolling, the two of them almost sound like they are playing a game of Can You Top This. “I’m too cold, now I’m too warm, the car heater is blowing in my eyes, the seat doesn’t feel right, my underwear are too tight, the sun is at a bad angle, my arm itches, etc.” All in a 5-minute car ride to the movie theatre.

It gets exhausting being in a car especially if the two of them are going on and on about every aspect of their personal comfort. I’m a problem solver and try to ‘tend’ to those things. After enduring months and months, and secretly complaining to my dance friends, I tried the NVC thing for awhile. The complaining would get better, but then would get bad again. I lost my patience with it after about 7-8 months. I’m an Army brat. If I had been in a car with my parents with a constant litany of complaints that I could easily have solved on my own, LIKE PUTTING ON THE FREAKING SWEATER RIGHT NEXT TO ME ON THE CAR SEAT, I would have been left at a gas station.

Not too long ago I was enduring yet another ‘complaint’ ride listening to every physical change each of them experienced. My SO said something like, “Do you know what I need?”

And my response was, “Yes. a Princess bandaide and a binky!”

NVC, Ghandi and Mother Teresa.....right out the window.

Has the complaining stopped? No. But I can now wave a Princess bandaid to get a temporary stop to it. It makes him laugh, though, and he promises to work on not complaining so much.






"If you are going to walk on thin ice, you might as well dance!"

 

[TheTick]

I read an article once about what kind of people Dr. Neil Clark Warren aims to exclude from eharmony.com (internet matchmaker). One type is people who are chronically dissatisfied with everything.

 

[ScottyUK]

Isn't that one of the reasons why people become engineers - to make things better than they are to start with?

Oh, my mistake. Some of us do it for the money...


jmw, SomptingGuy - we have much in common.



Why do so many of of you use 'S.O.' as an abbreviation for girlfriend or boyfriend, husband or wife? Is it some dreadful politically correct way of avoiding declaring whether you're married or not, or whether you're straight of not? I only ever see it on Eng-Tips so I don't know whether it's a US thing or an Eng-Tips thing.


----------------------------------

If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!

 

[SomptingGuy]

SO

I hate the terms girlfriend and boyfriend. I haven't been a teenager for a long time. Given that partner was hijacked by the gay community a long time ago, there aren't many other words or expressions left.

SO is gender neutral and doesn't imply any kind of sexual orientation or social commitment.


- Steve

 

[jmw]

We could try EI, I suppose ('er indoors);
"Trouble" (Trouble and strife), (so long as we stick with London expressions and avoid like the plague Oz terms of endearment (Bush Hog, Glamour Maggot), we are safe... my wife could teach the CIA a thing or two about email surveillance).
SWMBO (She Who Must Be Obeyed) but its true, most such terms a gender specific, including, by inference, Better Half", and SO is concise.

Cass,
I kept thinking of you as an engineer and was shocked by your having an arguments list like any other woman.
But if your Arguments list is continuously updated to remove obsolete and fictitious crimes, if you only argue about one thing at a time, if you stick to logic, you will have broken the mold.
I had thought that the Engineer part of your personality might make this difference.
We shall see when you relate further episodes of the dietary code, which obviously you are now commited to do.

Kenat,
it wasn't until we had the "Investors in People" team around that I discovered that I was a cynic. In fact, they said I was a cynical terrorist, or something to that effect.




JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

I interpret SO as being a partner in a common-law relationship.

What's wrong with spouse? That's gender neutral and covers both married and common-law relationships.

 

[TheTick]

My sister-in-law doesn't have an SO. She has an IJO: "insignificant just-another".

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

That opens up another point of view. If you have a Significant Other, does that mean that everyone else is insignificant?

 

[KENAT]

So Cass, was that a no?

Ducking for cover...

Sompting, I have had similar with the Mrs, I now accept that when home I am a Calf to be fattened and when away during the week I try and make up for it. If I ever find a job in town I'm in trouble though.

mizz joey, Any success when you saw the guy?

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at posting policies:

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[HgTX]

"Spouse" doesn't cover relationships where the people aren't married, either by certificate or common law.

"S.O." ain't my favorite phrase but since I can't come up with a better one (in terms of neutrality of gender, marital, and cohabitative status) I'm not about to start complaining about it. "Lover" would work from a definitional stance, but is too sexually loaded for this forum (and rather ooks me out, anyway).

Hg


Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[debodine]

HgTX, in my opinion anyone who ever "ooks you out" should be banned from the forum. I mean we engineers are fairly opened minded and reasonable people as a group, but no one, engineer or otherwise, should ever be required to accept an "ooking out" just to belong to this forum.

I am on your side ready to do virtual battle with the "ookers" in this world!

)

P.S. I hope you don't mind a bit of teasing...I just fell in love with the "ooks me out" phrase although I don't know why...it just struck me as hilarious)

 

[spongebob007]

Here is a different angle on the situation:

Before I was married I had a thing for this (single) gorgeous blonde admin. assistant where I used to work. I started to flirt with her and she did nothing to rebuff me. In fact, we started having lunch together almost every day. After a while we were seeing each other socially outside of work. I really thought (wanted) this to lead to a relationship. It wasn't just about sex either, I really liked this woman and could see myself falling in love with her. Things went on like this for about three months. Then one day we went out for drinks and a bite to eat after work. Afterwards I drove her back to her condo and we sat in the car for a good half hour talking. Then I leaned over and tried to kiss her. She pushed me away, and told me: "Sorry, but I'm just not attracted to you". What an awkward situation that was. Afterwards I was angry. I really felt used. I was also hurt. From that day on we had no relationship whatsoever. I will never know what HER intentions were, but to me it really felt like I had been used. I had paid for her meal quite often when we went out. When she had car problems I gave her rides not only to and from work, but also took her to run errands both during our lunch hour and after work. Did she think I was just being a good friend? I will never know. But I can tell you that from my perspective, I thought it was pretty obvious what my intentions were, and she never sent me any signals (unless they were too subtle for me to pick up) that she did not feel the same way until I finally tried to get physical with her. I walked away from the whole incident with a not too high opinion of her as a person.

I guess my point is, that if you hope to salvage any sort of professional relationship with this guy and/or minimize the chance that someone will get hurt, or end up in an extremely uncomfortable/awkward situation, then you need to be direct with him, and you need to do it now. A simple "I am not interested in you that way" should do the trick. Most men do their thinking below the belt, but we are not psychotic sex fiends. If you tell a guy in a plain, direct manner (why can't women figure this out?) that he is barking up the wrong tree, the message is usually received loud and clear. As others have pointed out, if you say things like "I don't date married men", ignore him, or worst of all, lead him on, then most of us men will think "game on!".

I will also tell you that this situation unfortunately has no happy ending. If you let him down now, be prepared to see your professional relationship end (assuming his intentions are more than just being a good mentor). Many men will do things and spend money on women in hopes that it will lead to a relationship, or at the very least sex. If you let him down gently now, he will most likely get the message and sooner or later he will probably not bother with you at all. You simply have to face up to that fact. The question is, do you want a clean break, or a messy break where you end up looking like a user?

P.S. The whole thing with his wife seems a little bizarre to me. If my wife found out I was mentoring some 22 year old hottie, the situation could get ugly very fast.

 

[mizzjoey]

Hi all...

Wow, I can't believe the lengths and details to which we have discussed this subject!

Anyway, I read your replies and sharing of similar experiences... Cass is right when she mentioned that I'm afraid of losing the benefits of this relationship. Mr. Senior is someone with years of experience in our specialized field, and the task for my postgraduate (Masters) thesis is writing a numerical program on his theoretical framework (he's working on his PhD), so we need to work closely together and I'd hate to ruin our small team over some emotional issue. Also, I don't want to disappoint our two lecturers - they've been very generous spending every weekend with the two of us when they don't have to.

That said, I never had the intention of leading him on and using him for freebies. I know some of my friends who do not pay her equal share when going out with guys... that is not something I do. I buy this senior lunch from time to time, especially after payday, since I owe him so much for sharing his expertise. Of course, my fiance gets fancier meals (Sorry Spongebob for your blonde crush; I hope your wife treats you better now :-D)

In retrospect... I realize that those after-lab lunches was not such a good idea, no matter whoever is paying. I merely thought that it was really nice to meet someone whom I can discuss technical things at length with... sans sexual attraction!

I've been firmly navigating my conversations with Mr Senior last Saturday to lab topics only, and he is slowly getting the idea that I'm not interested to entertain requests for social outings. Actually, this is something I've been doing since I started my postgraduate studies/working closely with him... so my OP was really due to frustration over having to repeat the same thing over and over again. Now I'm getting more comfortable with being more direct in expressing my discomfort. He has toned down somewhat and I might try a combination of Cass' and HgTX's suggestions when he needs to be reminded again.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

"Spouse" doesn't cover relationships where the people aren't married, either by certificate or common law.

I disagree! It may be more a Canadian thing but "common law spouse" is a legally defined relationship.

http://www.familylawtoronto.ca/common_law.html

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&q="common+law+spouse"+america&btnG=Search&meta=

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q="common+law+spouse"&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

 

[TheTick]

Confused. You disagree by reaffirming Hg's statement?

 

[HamishMcTavish]

CorBlimeyLimey,

Statement about common law relationships does not hold in the UK - no legal standing.

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[ewh]

It does in many of the US staes, though.

"The ambassador and the general were briefing me on the - the vast majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and we will bring them to justice." - [small]George Bush, Washington DC, 27 October, 2003[/small]

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

TheTick,

How/where did I reaffirm Hg's statement?

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Hamish,

From what I see it's 50/50. For social welfare it's accepted, but for taxation it's not.