Azure Jane Lunatic (Azz) 🌺 (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
azurelunatic) wrote2001-05-04 11:12 pm
azurelunatic) wrote2001-05-04 11:12 pm
Sneakernet
Having discussion with friend about the female understandings of information transmission.
Sometimes women, just to be sneaky, tell something to someone who knows someone else knowing that word will trickle through to the person it's intended to trickle to but it doesn't always work well when a guy is the intermediary.
For example, if I had something I wanted to tell some particular guy, but I didn't want him to hear it from me, I would tell someone else who knew him, who would pass it on to him. Gossip, you know? "You know, I was talking to that guy Dave the other day, and it turns out that way back when, when you two were in fencing class together? He had such a bad crush on you, and would have dated you SO fast if only you'd been 18."
In that case, the intermediary was a guy, my then-fiance, who promptly got whacked around with a pillow, because he'd told me about Dave way too late for it to have done anyone any good.
Of course, I'm not sure that Dave intended for me to hear about that.
In another case, I told a guy something that any chick in her right mind would have passed on, and he was completely clueless as to the fact that he was expected to pass it on, considering that he'd just happened to mention that he knew the guy and talked to him often. I whacked him with a virtual sandbag a couple times, and he seemed to get the message.
Still don't know if he passed the information on, though. Maybe I need to wallop him some more. But now that I've told him, the *point* of the gossip connection is lost. It needs, to be proper, a certain amount of spontainiety, or else you're a chicken who can't say the things that need to be said, and relys on other people to do the dirty work.
A chick, on the other hand, would know that it was her guy-friend who needed to hear this through the grapevine, and would pass it on to him, and if he didn't know what was going on, he might never know that the information had been passed to him deliberately. It needs to be done more subtlely if the eventual recipient is a chick, because by the Chick Codes, if there's only one intermediary, it's bound to be seen as a personally delivered and direct message, because unless the first chick didn't know that the second chick was friends with the third chick, the first chick would never have talked about the third chick to the second chick unless it was meant to be passed on.
Confused?
Sometimes women, just to be sneaky, tell something to someone who knows someone else knowing that word will trickle through to the person it's intended to trickle to but it doesn't always work well when a guy is the intermediary.
For example, if I had something I wanted to tell some particular guy, but I didn't want him to hear it from me, I would tell someone else who knew him, who would pass it on to him. Gossip, you know? "You know, I was talking to that guy Dave the other day, and it turns out that way back when, when you two were in fencing class together? He had such a bad crush on you, and would have dated you SO fast if only you'd been 18."
In that case, the intermediary was a guy, my then-fiance, who promptly got whacked around with a pillow, because he'd told me about Dave way too late for it to have done anyone any good.
Of course, I'm not sure that Dave intended for me to hear about that.
In another case, I told a guy something that any chick in her right mind would have passed on, and he was completely clueless as to the fact that he was expected to pass it on, considering that he'd just happened to mention that he knew the guy and talked to him often. I whacked him with a virtual sandbag a couple times, and he seemed to get the message.
Still don't know if he passed the information on, though. Maybe I need to wallop him some more. But now that I've told him, the *point* of the gossip connection is lost. It needs, to be proper, a certain amount of spontainiety, or else you're a chicken who can't say the things that need to be said, and relys on other people to do the dirty work.
A chick, on the other hand, would know that it was her guy-friend who needed to hear this through the grapevine, and would pass it on to him, and if he didn't know what was going on, he might never know that the information had been passed to him deliberately. It needs to be done more subtlely if the eventual recipient is a chick, because by the Chick Codes, if there's only one intermediary, it's bound to be seen as a personally delivered and direct message, because unless the first chick didn't know that the second chick was friends with the third chick, the first chick would never have talked about the third chick to the second chick unless it was meant to be passed on.
Confused?