agonyaunt | Dear Prudence: I Made a Mistake While Matchmaking

I confess to being something of a busybody matchmaker for a fairly large circle of friends at my university. A couple of months ago, I tried to set up a male friend, “Don,” with a girl I knew, “Erica.” I introduced them, they chatted, seemed to be all right when I left, but it fizzled out.

I spoke to Don afterwards and asked what went wrong, and he first tried to downplay it by saying there wasn’t a spark, but after I questioned him a bit, he mentioned that he found Erica’s unshaved armpits unattractive.

I must have shown something on my face because he started saying that he doesn’t want to change her or thinks it’s important for her to depilate, but it’s a preference he has and at such an early stage of meeting, it wasn’t something he wanted to pursue. I’ve lost a lot of respect for Don, and while I haven’t cut contact, I have spoken to him a lot less since.

Recently, another friend of mine on campus, “Danielle,” expressed some interest in Don and asked for an introduction. I’m not sure if I should, and I’m not sure if I should express his faintly misogynistic body preferences to her? Should I tell her to avoid Don or not?

A: There’s no professional code of conduct for volunteer matchmakers. There’s also nothing problematic about giving a fairly bland introduction to someone who asked for one, if you’re not feeling enthusiastic about the potential coupling. If it’s easier to say yes to Danielle, you could say “Hey Don, we haven’t talked for a while but my friend wanted to be introduced to you. Here’s her phone number” and leave it at that. If she ends up finding out about his armpit hair issues, she will survive and emerge unscathed, I promise. He’s a guy with a preference that rubs you the wrong way, not a murderer.

But if you feel really strongly that someone with his views doesn’t deserve a hookup, you are the all-powerful matchmaker and get to decide that! So you’re also totally within your rights to say “He and I aren’t close anymore and haven’t talked much for a while, so I’m not the person to make an introduction.”

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I tagged this 'sexism'. Should I have?

I would say yes. A question can be about sexism even if sexism isn't necessarily the answer. If that makes sense.

Agreed. The LW is thinking about sexism and that's what motivated her question.

*nod* Thank you for answering me. :)

That makes sense. Thank you for answering my question. :)

I feel like there's a crucial point here which Prudie missed, which is that if you know Danielle doesn't shave you should warn her you're pretty sure she's not his type. And if she is his type then it shouldn't have to come up.

And if she is his type then it shouldn't have to come up.

One of the reasons I posted this is that I'm not sure about this point. Is a requirement for shaved armpits a simple taste or is it sexist? Is a guy who requires shaved armpits more likely to be critical of normal human bodies in other ways that might make him unpleasant or even hurtful to date? I'm not sure.

I think it's certainly possible for a desire for shaved women only to be sexist. But I also think it's fundamental to anti-sexism work to acknowledge that nobody is obligated to be attracted to another person, no matter what, and they don't have to feel guilty about it.

If the guy had responded to her question as if he thought every woman was required to meet his preferences that would be one thing, but it sounds like he's acknowledging that his preference (and the social factors that probably influenced it) is his problem and nobody else's. And even if he was aware it was something he should work on, dating someone he didn't find attractive and had no other connection to probably isn't a good first step.

(Speaking as someone who is female-ish and unshaven but also very ace, so I come at all questions of attraction from a remove. ETA: I was going to talk more about possible red flags here but this kind of 'set up for a date' situation where everything is banked on sexual attraction is pretty foreign to me. But some people seem to like it.)

Edited 2022-02-11 19:50 (UTC)

I'm wondering why the LW felt the need to keep questioning "Don" after he said "there wasn't a spark". If the LW had taken Don at his word instead of pushing for more detail, there wouldn't have been an issue. And if a friend introduced me to someone and then started grilling me for reasons why I decided against dating the person, I'd be really annoyed.

This person takes their amateur matchmaking way, way too seriously.

Yes, Don is being sexist. No, you shouldn't feel obligated to matchmake to his benefit, even if Danielle seems like she would fit his preferences and wants an introduction.

Does Don think he was speaking confidentially to you? It sounded like you pried the real answer out of him.

Do you owe Don your confidentiality on this?
* It's not something that he divulged willingly.
* Without context, it could be a minor preference.
* Don respected Erica's autonomy enough to not go into a relationship knowing that he'd prefer her body different.
* He's aware that it's something you disapprove of.
* It's possible that you have a reputation for discretion, and airing Don's confidence could damage that.
* Unless he shows other subtle cues of sexism, I would weight my reputation higher than airing a minor sexist preference.

Would you be doing Danielle a disservice to introduce her to Don?
* Don has a sexist preference.
* We don't get the luxury of no context these days, and it can be a sentinel preference that hints at deeper-rooted sexism.
* Your willingness to connect people is not a zero-value thing; since Danielle is asking you for an introduction rather than trying to see Don on her own, she seems to value your reputation of good judgement.

So I would arrive at nearly the same answer as Prudence, but for different reasons. I would keep Don's confidence unless there are signs that it shouldn't be kept, but not lend my endorsement to Don as a potential dating partner either.

It’s one thing not to set people up; it’s another to refuse to provide a requested introduction. LW is responding to a request, not making a recommendation, and may do so with a clear conscience.

I disagree with Prudie here a bit. "There’s no professional code of conduct for volunteer matchmakers." No, not a professional code, but there's an implicit one. People in a friend group routinely inform one another about others they have dated (I'm removing some sexist language of my own, but this is overwhelmingly a thing for women.) Information passed casually helps to screen out inappropriate matches (or find unexpected good ones!) and in the worst case can identify a bad actor and help others avoid them. The good old missing stair.

If LW is setting people up, they should inform themselves about who they're connecting. An introduction is an implicit recommendation. LW should tell Danielle what they already know about Don.

I'm also wondering whether Don said this to Erica's face. I bet he didn't. But I bet he's discussed it with male friends.

Dear Prudence: I Made a Mistake While Matchmaking

question

Re: question

Re: question

Re: question

Re: question

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject