Oh ok. No, I didn’t think he was implying I was a whore. That’s what you read into it. I took odds with the language implying that I was a piece of property to be “taken.” But I was very gracious. Don’t worry. Good thoughts !

Ok, don't take this wrong. I'm rooting for you. But there's the red flag.

He said something that's a common expression, "taken", which is used for both men and women. It was clearly intended to be a compliment.

You chose an unlikely interpretation that clearly didn't match intent or common usage and decided to get offended about it.

After all your self description, I was wondering "how is she single?"

Right there, now I understand. I'd be out the door. Someone that is looking HARD for ways to be offended is not relationship material.

Think about your need to assign your meanings to other people's words. Maybe talk to a professional. This one thing can sink you.

Good luck!

> Someone that is looking HARD for ways to be offended is not relationship material.

Relationship material is subjective, and this is a really insensitive way to say you don't think you'd be compatible with them (some might say insensitivity makes someone "not relationship material")

For what it's worth, I'm a man and I understand why that language is off-putting to women. Also more interested in women who are more interested in being the taker than the takee, but I'm weird like that, I think gender scripts have most men seeking women looking for partners to take a more passive role (at least in some regards)

Well said, also another red flag, at least for me, is that she mentioned that she is looking for qualities of a partner like looking for a CTO. But the difference is that with a CTO is it is purely an economic relationship which can be terminated at anytime with no hard feelings while with a life partner or a husband, it is more of a covenant relationship meant to survive future uncertainties and so really less flashy qualities such as loyalty, tolerance and humility are more attractive than popularity, beauty or intelligence.

I absolutely disagree. Someone you work with every day who is an intimate partner in your company that you depend on for your livelihood is far from someone that you can terminate with no hard feelings. I'm sure anyone who has built a company and had to part with a CTO knows that there were many many feelings involved and it was a real partnership and by no means easy.

loyalty, tolerance and humility are qualities i would also like in a business partner because our business relationship should also be able * to survive future uncertainties*

I was thinking the same thing.

I'm not comment OP, but you literally said "I was like, um, I’m not sure I knew I was for SALE?"

A women for sale is pretty much a whore, so it doesn't seem they read into rather than taking you literally.

But even regardless, the fact that you took his word 'taken' in a literal sense rather than the compliment it was intended as, and here your defending it again rather than reflecting.

If your crossing off guys because they compliment you with common colloquial phrases that you take literally and negatively, well, you will indeed have a short list of suiters.

How would you feel on a date if a woman asked, "why have you not been taken?"

Impossible to answer. Social cues are tough. It all depends on how it was said and how it was meant - could be a totally innocuous comment or something to be concerned about.

For some people, “why have you not been taken” may mean nothing more than “I really like you and I can’t believe you are available.”

If we have been chatting friendly for a while already, then flattered. It's clearly implying that from their perspective I appear to be very desirable.

And if it was a serious question asked early on, I would probably reply with something I don't like about myself, a weakness, if you will. It's not an entirely unreasonable question.

It's called "negging", and manipulators use this tactic all the time. Most commonly against women. Gross is an understatement for this breed of human.

Seems completely unrelated to the comment at hand

I’m very confused