Old-fashioned (or, 5 weeks to phone)

I grew up in the 1980s, many years before I had an e-mail address, much less daily access to a computer. Thusly, it took time for me to accept that Instant Messaging is now the accepted flirtation portion when dating.

Something about the word "chat," maybe, sounds juvenile.

But I'm now on board with IM, particularly after 4 months of being both good and bad on OKCupid!. It's the method of choice, actually. I myself have gotten much better at it, and now depend on it to get a painless and, well, instant sense about a man's crucial interpersonal skills. Such as .... how quickly he can type? Can he banter on the fly? Does he try to tempt me with lewdness or wit?

The last 5 weeks I've been engaged in a give-and-take on OKC with a dude from Cape Cod. He first hit me via IM on Friday, May 15. I was on the site only sporadically that day, so we didn't engage fully until after 5 p.m., when I was briefly on-line before leaving work. So I apologized for cutting it short, but said I'd chat with him later. He responded:

CC: (508) XXX-XXXX if you're interested, Karin. It's a better way to introduce oneself.

That was as quick as I have gotten anyone's phone number. In the meantime I had checked out some details of his profile, which included the following:

"I’m really good at ... making you uncomfortable, I would imagine. I'm not too shabby with loud electric guitars, either."

"You should message me if ... you're not going to flake out. Think hard about that one, please."

A sense of the demanding about this one. I wasn't going to call him after 15 lines of an innocuous IM chat. I went about my weekend, did not call him.

Sure enough on Monday, May 18, mid-afternoon, he reappeared:

CC: Hello again

K: Hey there.

CC: I dropped off my number just in case. I like recklessness.

Being at work, I couldn't talk for long.

K: Hey there, gotta go.

CC: Sorry sorry. Ah, well, use that number. : )

We returned for a slightly longer conversation after 5 p.m., but it ended abruptly when I had to take a work-related phone call. No goodbye or future plans. I still did not feel compelled to call him. Too vague.

Consequently, we fell out of touch, which happens frequently on the OKC. Weeks passed.

Then:

CC: Hi again (June 8, 4:51 pm)

CC: Hiiii. (June 9: 3:11 pm)

CC: Hi. (June 10: 4:12 pm)

CC: Hi . (June 10: 4:22 pm)

A barrage of chat requests, never at a point where I was in a position to answer them. But I had to admit falling prey to such persistance. So I that night I sent him an e-mail.

K (12:01 am): So the story seems to be that whenever you hit me to chat I have already gone offline and these scintillating "hi" messages show up in my e-mail instead. Sorry for the perceived ignoring. Not the case. How goes?

CC (7:29 am): They ARE scintillating, aren't they? I'm telling you - 508 XXX-XXX. It'll feel more human, AND there won't be any ambiguity where ignoring me is concerned. It's a wonderful idea.

A week passed. As you may guess, no phone call from me. And .... yesterday, again, he sent me a chat request when I wasn't online.

Sigh. At 5:09 p.m. I jumped back into the fray.

K: Hiiii....

CC: hahah Hi!

K: hahah hi! back

CC: You know I figured that I just freaked you out last time.

CC: But I'm nothing if not persistent.

K: What, by the whole "you must call me or else" bit?

CC: I don't remember, honestly. : )

K: Are you in the habit of freaking people out (or at least believing that you did)?

CC: The latter, absolutely.

K: It does give good credence to your argument that talking in person probably alleviates the unknown.

CC: Mm hmm. It does.

K: Although, why are you always worried about freaking people out? I'm just kind of wondering what that says....

CC: It says I freak people out often, and that I don't particularly enjoy it.

K: Oh.

K: My question more was .... what exactly is it that you are doing to cause such a(potential) reaction?

CC: Intensity, that's all.

CC: Call call call constant IM-ing. That weirds people out, believe it or not.

K: Well, I suppose it is all in the context. It's cool if it is welcome.

CC: Sometimes, determining that sort of thing is difficult.

CC: For me, anyway.

K: True.

K: Ah, online romance.

K: Awash in ambiguity and misunderstanding.

K: Mostly.

CC: hahah Romance, yeah.

K: Yes.

K: Perhaps romance is a misnomer.

CC: I think maybe yes.

K: What shall one call it then....

CC: Tryst-ism.

"Tryst-ism" became a word at 5:18 p.m. We chatted for another 30 minutes, about what traditionally ends up being a subject of a chat conversation between 2 folks who list "casual dating" as one of their interests: past dating activity on the OKC. Likes and dislikes. Sex. Him feeling "sheepish" because he had "prodded the living s#$*" out of me.

And it ended as such:

K: But we should chat.

CC: You have the number.

K: Because I agree that it would be interesting. When is a generally good time of day?

CC: The evening.

CC: Only took a month to seem interesting. ; )

K: F*#$ off! ;-)

K: OK. No waiting by the phone, but I'll check in sometime. Tomorrow might be better.

CC: heheheh I'll do my best to stop begging.

CC: Thanks for saying hi.

This better be one fan-damn-tastic phone call.