Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site hou2b.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hou2b!sims From: sims@hou2b.UUCP (J.SIMESTER) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Sex and the Business Lunch Message-ID: <238@hou2b.UUCP> Date: Wed, 21-Mar-84 11:00:59 EST Article-I.D.: hou2b.238 Posted: Wed Mar 21 11:00:59 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 22-Mar-84 00:21:33 EST Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ Lines: 46 The following comes from a USA Today (3/21/84, page 3B) review of the book "Power Lunching: How You Can Profit From More Effective Business Lunch Strategy" by E. Melvin Pinsel and Ligita Dienhart. On flirting and the power lunch: It's OK if it will help you to gain an edge. Men: Try "Your voice sounded so scintillating on the phone, I tried visualizing your appearance, and I must say you surpassed all expectations." Women: Try "placing your hand over his at the table as you're making a point," or removing your shoe and kicking him gently under the table. Certainly neither of these would be appropriate business behavior for dealing with MOTSS. The interesting thing to me is that the suggestion for men sounds like a blatant, transparent pick-up line. If the roles were reversed, I would find it insulting if I were a serious business-person, but would probably let it pass if it meant getting what I was after (the realist in me overules the idealist). In any event, the intent of the line should be rather obvious to all but the most naive or vain. The suggestion for women, on the other hand, is more subtle, suggestive, and physical. It seems to me to be MUCH more open to misinterpretation - and for that reason, probably much more effective in achieving its purpose! How many women out there would fail to see through the man's approach? How many men would not be flattered and in some way influenced by the woman's (be honest!) For that matter, why is it that the man is told to be verbal and the woman to "get physical?" Has yet another double standard been established wherein men touching women is sexist while the reverse is company policy? I haven't read the book, so I can't say if it treats both sexes more equally on the subject of flirting for gain when read in its entirety. However, I did find the excerpt to be food for thought. Rather than delve deeper, at this point I'll just throw the subject open for reactions. (Please note - I personally don't buy using sex to do business in any way, form, shape, or manner, be it stupid remarks or playing footsie under the table. The questions raised above are intended to stimulate discussion, and do not necessarily reflect the feelings of their originator. :-) ) -- Jim ..!houxm!hou2b!sims