Those are Lime, maybe Yellow-colored flags.

Red flags are: drinks or uses drugs too heavily. Cheated on his exes. Has more than 1 DUI. Has shitty credit and an unstable job history. Is known to the police. Your friends instinctively dislike him (more of an orange flag, some people aren't good at more than 1 on 1 interactions). Etc.

Wanting to be your boyfriend after a first date is a sign he might be clingy, not an abuser. Overall it doesn't even seem like he's into her any more than she's into him and the difference is that he's more verbal about it? I mean, whatever - you're both into each other and have highly overlapping sexual desires. Go get it.

Calling you "love" could just be a(n ill-advised) nickname, but Sportlandia is right, "Wanting to be your boyfriend after a first date" was a sign of clinginess/neediness not abuser. But just because he's not dangerous doesn't mean that he's in good working order. It would help both of you if he got some counseling to establish healthy boundaries.

The suggested script is so awkward and cringe worthy I thought I was reading Dear Prudence. I don't know who wouldn't get defensive at someone literally calling them out as emotionally immature or as a potential abuser. Agree to keep eyes open, but especially in the Internet dating age where people often communicate a decent amount before ever meeting, I don't think it's that bizarre to jump to a dating label quickly if you meet and are reallly into someone. My husband and I started spending almost every night together after our first date and were officially dating within a week.

Everything is a red flag these days. Tell him to cool it down a bit (in the nicest way possible), and see how he responds over time. Does he keep pushing? Or, does he respect the distance you need at this point in your relationship? Then decide what to do.

Good luck!!

There’s something (maybe someTHINGS) off about this guy, I guess best case scenario is that he’s 33 and socially awkward with a bent social filter. The things you mentioned may not qualify as full-on red flags, but they’re definitely eyebrow-raisers. Keep him on a short leash during the breaking-in phase.

When I was a young kid it wasn't unusual after a first date that finished in sex to mention the word going steady or girlfriend.

I don't understand how you kids have sex soo freely with people without any connection.

@-3 Yeah, I read that, and my first thought was, "Holy shit, someone coming at me with that spiel would make me defensive, too!" I mean, I would be embarrassed and apologize, but yeah, there would be defensiveness in there.

Besides, this happened awhile back, so bringing it back up now after she already addressed it in the moment when he apparently hasn't reoffended since would just be weird. I agree these are yellow flags. The advice to keep her eyes peeled for more is good, but just enjoy this in the meantime.

One possibility Dan left out is he is the "Sophisticated Manipulator" and an avid Savage Love reader (because there's no "Stranger" in LWs town), sees this column, and reacts mortified-ly after LWs challenge from Dan, to hide his abusive side. Just sayin'

I agree with most commenters---the LW's boyfriend sounds more clingy than abusive. It's still good to keep eyes and ears open.

@5 DonnyKlicious & @7 Morty: I know this is off topic, but seeing your relative avatars so close together made this Berkley Breathed fan smile. AACK-OOP!

To be fair to the LW, it is technically possible that the clingy thing was just an act designed to snare someone who truly is clingy to abuse them. But that seems /extremely/ unlikely and lame; and kudos to the LW for not being that susceptible clingy person herself anyway.

Yeah maybe the reason he hasn't locked it down yet is because he can't i.e. he ain't shit OR he never wanted to lock anything down before and now that he's ready he's like "yes, you, let's go". Either way you gotta try and judge when your blood is in your brain not your crotch. Either way he sounds like a project.

Agree with everyone that asking her to be his GF early isn’t really a red flag (but possibly a yellow flag). That happened to me a lot when I was young — I dated a lot of guys from other cultures in which that was not considered out of the ordinary, but a sign that they’re into you. I think it’s nice to be able to express your feelings toward someone you’re dating honestly.

He's probably spent too much time watching English movies and thinks he's from Yorkshire, where "love" is a term used by many people.

Dan's advice is good. Since the girlfriend and the love thing are both about what to call someone with whom you are in a sexually active but not committed early stage relationship, it could be that he has just unskillfully navigated the question of how to refer to one another. Some people feel more comfortable with labels.

Now I'm in a small town too, so I'll add something that a big city boy like Dan might not have thought of- it's pretty important in a place where you are nearly guaranteed to have overlapping social connections to make sure you are on the same page with what labels you use. If you don't get a clingy possessive vibe from him otherwise, this could be an extension of his attempts to have very clear boundaries- those include how you refer to one another. So maybe have that conversation with him. Do we refer to one another as "friends"? "A person I'm dating"? etc. I'm harping on about this because it appears in the letter that he asked if he can refer to you as the gf, not if you will be his gf- sounds like an issue more of clarity in terminology rather than an assumption for commitment.

And in my experience, "love" is a term of endearment such as "honey" or "dear"- not something I like myself, but not indicating an actual feeling of love either.

1,2,9 (Sporty & Curious & Griz): Clinginess/neediness is often a red flag for abuse- hence the caution. More often than that, it only escalates into annoyance or drama, but plenty of abusers are motivated by clinginess- surely you guys know that? The threats to kill oneself if you leave, the stalking behaviors, the violence upon rejection or attempts to leave, the controlling behavior because of fear of being left, etc. To put it this way, most clingy people are not abusers but most abusers are clingy.

I agree that the things described in this letter do not raise red flags for me in the way that they are told, but if she is sensing red flags, sometimes it's hard to put your finger on what it is, and without clarity on concerning issues, it's normal to have a certain amount of caution.

3- sharp objects, saying you are dating and saying someone is your girlfriend is two different things as the later ordinarily implies exclusivity and the former doesnt, but for ease of conversation, people can use "girlfriend/boyfried" to mean someone you are dating since there's no word for that other than "friend". I would have just asked for clarification for what he meant.

Donny has it right here. Azul too with a different spin.

Playing devil's advocate- if we are going to wonder if the LW is over-reacting, one thing in that favor is that she thinks 25-33 is a concerning age difference. When I was mid 20s, seemed like people were either fully adult- in the grown up work force, grown up relationships, etc in which case 33 is basically the same- or they were still figuring things out and hanging out with very young people. So it could be that it's the LW that's still a little immature? If she thinks 33 is old and obsesses over terminology etc?

I like Dan's basic approach but I agree that defensive is a pretty normal piece of response. The signal is whether he does defensive but really accepts that the LW finds this offputting and troubling. Or if he does defensive and can't accept that her response is equally as valid as his presumed good intentions.

Especially if he gets either cries or gets offended and tries to make her apologize. Good to find out early.

And yes to @15, the LW might think about what it was that raised her nape hairs. That might help answer the question she brings to Dan.

Was there something presumptive in the way he asked, or like he was trying to position to make "no" a bit harder? Those are red flags, especially if he's good at it, but any deployment of those moves in an intimate relationship is at best a bad habit. And at his age I'm skeptical he's ever going to break it. And if he is you don't have to sign up as magical helper girlfriend for the project.

@3/sharpobjects &@7/morty: +1. I would not recommend CK using Dan's approach because I think many people would be at least somewhat defensive in their reaction, which makes it an invalid test of your hypothesis. I also agree that if this happened one time, four or five weeks ago, it is a bit far back to raise now in this way. Use common sense, stay alert for trouble, get second opinions from your friends and family.

@15/EmmaLiz: I agree that CK feeling like 33-25 is a significant age gap suggests her perceptions are not entirely accurate.

LW comes from a small town in which it is hard to find kinky people. How many letters does Dan get from people in this situation? Lots, and often they are told to move to the big city. But even in the big city, finding someone with whom you share mutual attraction, interests, cultural things, and kinks can be hard. Here, LW and her guy seem to fit each other well and share overlapping kinks. So in addition to NRE, this guy may be feeling a huge sense of relief to have found someone compatible in their small town.

How many years back in time do we need to go to when it was, if you fucked and the guy DIDNT want to call you your girlfriend, it was a red flag. 30 years? Fewer?

Well, you do need to be on higher alert for red flags in BDSM relationships because of the greater risks involved in consensually violent and controlling relationships. That being said, just keep some good boundaries and keep your eyes open and you should be fine.

How does she bolt when he's got her all tied up?

25 and 33 is not an age gap. Just saying.

Sporty @1: sorry, but wanting to get too committed straightaway COULD be the sign of an abuser. Or someone who's clingy. Or both. Being too clingy IS abuse, or often escalates to abuse. CK should heed her instincts. My crystal ball, which I admit is as cloudy as Venn's, says that this guy has a history of committing far too soon in relationships, to women he barely knows, and bolting at the end of the 90-day money-back-guarantee period, leaving a trail of broken hearts in his wake. Or they bolt due to his clinginess that escalates into controlling. If CK hasn't yet encountered the shower-you-with-compliments-then-vanish type, Mr 33 may be her lesson.

A few commenters don't seem to understand what the term "red flag" means. It's a warning. It means that something MIGHT be wrong, not that something IS DEFINITELY wrong. Sure, he could just be really into her, and prematurely enthusiastic. He COULD be manipulative and controlling. Too soon to tell, but the possibility means she should be wary of getting too close until she knows which it is.

I do agree that closing the speech with "what the hell were you thinking?" is extreme. She already has been blunt about the too-soon nature of his girlfriend request, so she needs to see if he backs off or keeps up the pressure. And be prepared for him to continue his pattern of losing interest after that few months. She may be amazing, but I bet some of his previous "girlfriends" were also amazing, yet none of them seemed to last. Hmm.

Surfrat @13: Or he IS English. I agree that calling someone "love" is not the same as saying you love them.

The other option is that he's not A typical. I'm dating a man who has an autistic daughter and if he's not also on the spectrum I'll eat some piece proverbial clothing. He was talking about our future a couple dates in. Totally freaked me out until I realised he just had no filter. He says whatever he's thinking/feeling. It threw me completely for a loop but now I've relaxed into it it's great because I know I'll never have to wonder, he'll always tell me. Not everyone conforms to social norms.

@6 "When I was a young kid it wasn't unusual after a first date that finished in sex to mention the word going steady or girlfriend."

I'm in my late 60s, and that was a red flag back then, too, as a young adult. People who acted like that were seen as being either very immature or very creepy. That's behavior more appropriate to 15 and 16 year olds who've watched too many rom coms.

Someone who's thinking of getting into a relationship with you immediately, before they know much about you, is not looking at long term criteria. They're not even really looking at you. They have a fantasy partner in mind and they're shoehorning you into that mental construct whether you fit or not.

You need to look at a lot more than the quality of the sex when you're looking for someone who you'd still want to be with twenty years from now. Is the other person kind? thoughtful? Are they humorous in a way you like? Are they supportive / glamorous / down to earth / surreal / practical? Whatever it is that you think will make someone a lastingly good partner for who you are is what you should be looking for, if you're going for a long term relationship.

And all of that being careful can be sabotaged by premature monogamy. Premature monogamy has overwhelmed a lot of people's recognition of red flags with someone they're just getting involved with. When only one person is providing all the sex you're having, your natural wiring will ramp up the emotional attachment to him or her and make you blind to red flags that are obvious to everyone else. A couple of years later you wake up and, if you're still together, find that you were either incredibly lucky, and the person has long-term good qualities you weren't paying attention to, or that you weren't lucky, and the person has long-term bad qualities you weren't paying attention to and you've got to get out of there.

Another thing I think some commenters may be missing is that they're assuming abuse is intentional. Most of the time, it is not. The abuser does not purposely seek out victims to behave cruelly towards. More often, the abuser is simply someone who has been treated so badly themself that they have no idea what is acceptable behaviour in relationships. That's why the abusee excuses the behaviour: they understand this person had a terrible childhood/abusive ex, so they can't help being clingy/controlling/manipulative. It's not their fault. Well, that may be true, but it still damages the victim, and it's still not okay, and it should be called out for what it is, so the abuser can be alerted to the fact that they need to address their issues and avoid extending the cycle of harm.

Anemone @25: Excellent point.

ECarpenter @26: Great post, thank you.

I’m also baffled by Dan’s script. In LW’s shoes I might have been a bit freaked out by the ‘girlfriend’ comments (not by the ‘love’ thing, where I am absolutely everybody calls each other ‘love’).

I think I’d have just given it a while. If things continued uncomfortable I’d have asked him to call me... whatever I wanted to be called, and nothing else. At that point it would have become clear if he had abusive tendencies. If not, being a bit desperate for affection but then being able to rein it in is... actually quite nice, in my book.

@15 EmmaLiz
"Clinginess/neediness is often a red flag for abuse...surely you guys know that?"

Never in my experience, but I'll take your word for it (and change your "often" to "sometimes") and sincerely thank you for helping me learn something.

"The threats to kill oneself if you leave"

Oh, /right/, absolutely! But I guess the word "clingy" makes me think sub rather than controlling. Very interesting overlap though, now that you mention it.

"most clingy people are not abusers"

I still only say "some"; perhaps because IMO vast numbers (most!) people have more than a little clingy going on, maybe not at first but later.

@23 BiDanFan
"25 and 33 is not an age gap. Just saying"

Agreed. (Even though the 1/2 + 7 guideline would make it a close call.)

@27 BiDanFan
SUCH an insightful post!

When I was 25, 33 felt like a minor-but-noteworthy age gap. I was definitely less lenient with guys in their 30s--if they didn't have their acts together, I found it very unattractive, whereas I understood it more with guys in their 20s. I knew I was less mature than I would be in my 30s, so I was slightly suspicious of guys who weren't dating women their own age. Eight years isn't a huge gap unto itself, but I very much understand what OP is saying.

Ms Fan has grasped the nature of the crystal ball.

Between say 25 and 40, the age gap isn't so important in years but in life scenarios. Americans in the twenty first century have extraordinary long adolescence - it's very possible that any two prior in that age range are at same point in their emotional development. So 25/33 is probably just fine, or it could be a problem. We certainly witness in reality that both genders are very willing to be attracted to someone within ~twenty years of them (directionally younger for men, older for women) even when they aren't on the same maturity level.

ECarp@26~ "...When only one person is providing all the sex you're having, your natural wiring will ramp up the emotional attachment to him or her and make you blind to red flags that are obvious to everyone else...."

Took me years to fully appreciate that and learn to trust my instincts... "sex is great here, but SOMETHING doesn't quite seem right" always got worse and never better. Over the years, the "benefit of the doubt period" got shorter and shorter as I became more adept at seeing things for what they really were, not what I wanted them to be.

@23 BiDanFan~ "...25 and 33 is not an age gap. Just saying..."
Ehhhhh, maybe not for the 33-year old who should by then have a pretty good grip on who he/she is and what he/she wants, but that's a world of maturity difference for most 25-year olds.

@Sporty 20-

Thirty years ago was 1988. I wasn't myself having sex then yet, but I was just a few years after that. Having sex with someone absolutely did not mean you were exclusive. I would say that the last time this was true was when it was rare for people to have sex without dating for a while first. And that has never been true for everyone as casual sex has always been a thing, but certainly it was true of anyone you'd "date" in the first place. My guess is that this would be back before the sexual revolution, so early 60s. You might be mixing it up with the requirement to call someone after sex and not ghost on them?

In any case, this LW didn't say he asked to call her his girlfriend after having sex. She said he did so after their first date. I'm assuming also that they had sex on their first date since they've met specifically for that. But to me, that makes it even weirder that he'd consider himself her boyfriend after a first time encounter with someone seeking a local kinkster to play with. Which is why the most generous interpretation is that he's actually asking to clarify terminology, not as an assumption of a relationship.

@curious- right, "clingy" can mean a lot of things. Most of the time, it will not mean "abusive". But some of the time it does. Clinginess can be controlling and jealous for example. Hence why this is a red flag. That does not mean it's a foregone conclusion- she said she noticed a red flag, not that she's sure the guy is an abuser. There's a classic pattern in domestic abuse where a person does something very violent and abusive and then later has a honeymoon period where the abuser feels guilty and showers the abused with attention, love, promises to be better. So they flip between putting the abused partner on a pedestal and controlling them with threats. Someone with more knowledge will have to explain the underlying motivations, but jealousy and neediness are part of it- abusers very frequently feel as if they can't live without their abused partner and the jealousy that the partner might move on or have an affair or leave them is why they are so controlling- targeting their money, their pets, threatening suicide, using physical abuse, restricting their freedom, destroying their friendships- all this to prevent the other person from leaving. So in the early stages, can you see why a person who is already after one date exhibiting signs of clinginess could be a red flag? (BTW I don't think this particular LW is describing something that sounds concerning to me, but generally speaking, this is why clinginess early on is potentially a red flag).

Also @6 "When I was a young kid it wasn't unusual after a first date that finished in sex to mention the word going steady or girlfriend."

Yes when you are young there are all sorts of stuff about "going steady", but this typically does not carry on into ones 30s. Just like how I use the word "best friend" to refer to three people with whom I am intimately close and have been for decades. If I were a kid, I'd probably have to rank them and inform them of their status as either my bestest or my next bestest, etc. But I'm not a kid.

@38 EmmaLiz
"can you see why a person who is already after one date exhibiting signs of clinginess could be a red flag?"

I do; but maybe not a huge one (aka a yellow one?).

"BTW I don't think this particular LW is describing something that sounds concerning to me"

I've found myself wondering as the thread unfolds if her instincts were right but her description was lacking. Maybe he really is an abuser and the LW simply failed to let us know (of course here all we sensibly have to go on is that they write, but in general I think people's intuition exceeds their communication skills).

Well I think I'm agreeing with BDF here that the problem is that people are misinterpreting what "red flag" means by their "yellow flag" distinctions, etc.

Rushing to commitment, over investment in a relationship early on- this is a red flag for jealousy and control. The whole point of "red flag" is that until time moves on, you don't know what's going to happen. You don't have retrospect. It's a warning that this is a behavior that- once you have hindsight- will be a sign of things to come. But the things haven't come. So you only have a red flag. The things might not come at all. I think this is what people here are calling "yellow flags"- but that's what a red flag is. A behavior that is overtly bad and isn't ambiguous (can't be interpreted various ways) isn't a red flag, it's bad behavior.

OK now an anecdote that you can skip if you like- it's just an attempt at illustration.

Once when I was fairly young, I went on a really great date with a guy who I really liked and was interested in. We had dinner, a great conversation, sex, and then we made plans for a second date without pinning down the date. I went home thinking he was great. I was in college then, and that week I got super busy with some project plus I was working. This was back before people really had cell phones so I had a landline with an answering machine. The dude called the next day. I got the message. I thought I should call him back, but I was busy. The second day- two days after the date- he called again three times and left three messages. That's four messages in two days. All the messages were polite. He referenced our tentative upcoming plans and said he wanted to pin down a date which was reasonable to him.

Now even though it was shitty of me to not call him back (even a quick "hey I'm busy let me call you next week") this seemed excessive to me. It was a red flag. EVEN THOUGH he was polite and I was the one who was not prioritizing. So instead of calling him back on the evening of day two, I procrastinated because something just felt wrong about it.

Day three, called several times and hung up, then a long rambling message about what a bitch I was. After that, he proceeded to call me for WEEKS- usually just to tell me what a bitch and a slut I was but also just to hang up on my machine. Sometimes he called dozens of times in one evening. I never spoke to him again. Thankfully he did not know where I lived. However, for years after that, I avoided the restaurant I'd taken him even though it was one of my faves because I thought he might show up there looking for me since it was really the only connection he had to find me.

From his point of view, you could make the case that I should have called him back over the day or two after our date- especially since I left our plans hanging. You could also make the case that the four calls in two days (all polite) were just concern or enthusiasm or- at worst- clinginess. But it felt wrong. It was a red flag. In retrospect, I was correct.

A couple more maybes to round out the speculation. Maybe his previous relationships didn’t last because he timely and appropriately revealed his kinks a few weeks in and the small town women bolted. Maybe he is awkward and moderately inappropriate because he is inexperienced at dating because there are so few options for him locally, as there are for you. It sounds like the maybes are worth exploring here, just be a little cautious. Open mind but also open eyes.

EmmaLiz @37: I was having sex in 1988 and if someone asked me to be their girlfriend after the first date or shag, that would have caused me concern too. SIXTY years ago -- before birth control -- things might have been different; people were more likely to follow a trajectory of commitment first ("going steady") then sex. But I still think early sex would not necessarily be a sign of early commitment, unless of course pregnancy resulted. Obviously, there are some "we fell in love straight away" exceptions. But even when that happened for me, even when I felt a strong connection after the first date/shag, I kept my enthusiasm to myself until the second, just to be sure!

EmmaLiz @40: Even if clinginess ISN'T a sign of jealousy and control, even if it's just a sign of clinginess, it's a sign that this person's needs might far exceed one's ability to fulfill them. And for someone who values their independence and alone time, that's a red flag they shouldn't ignore. Red flags can also signal fundamental incompatibility, and that can cause just as much relationship heartache as abuse.

I was having sex in the 80s and it really all depended on the situation and the person I was having sex with. With some women, it was clear to both of us that this would only be a casual thing, even if we ended up doing it more than once (or even quite often). With others, when we had sex, we instantly became exclusive. But again, it was a mutual thing, an understanding, more than a spoken agreement.

The red flag I saw was that he was 33 and all of his relationships burned out after a few weeks. Something isn't right.

"SIXTY years ago -- before birth control"

A pedantic historical note: condoms have been around for thousands of years and certainly in the 1950s and 1960s, albeit behind a counter at the pharmacist's and intimidating to ask for. Hormonal birth control, yes, came later, and corresponded with the "sexual revolution" but I think the 1960s and onward would have been sexually freer even if only condoms had been available. Watching other teenagers get killed on the Evening News empowered a generation and indicated that the establishment had gotten a lot of things wrong.

@40 EmmaLiz
"people are misinterpreting what "red flag" means by their "yellow flag""

Yup; I guess I made it worse by calling a little red flag a yellow flag. A red flag is just a warning. It's not a DTMFA-flag.

What a great story about yout great date with a guy who became neurotic then abusive. Sorry he did that to you.

Makes me shudder. I’d give this guy a wide birth for a bit, LW, so he gets the message. And if you didn’t agree to orgasm withholding, that’s another red flag.

Tim @44: A few months, not a few weeks, which is a much paler shade of red, but indeed, it's a pattern that can't be coincidence at his age.

David @45: Pedantry acknowledged; I did indeed mean "birth control pills." Condoms have been a thing for a long time, but men have rarely been keen to use them, with the possible exception of when AIDS was a death sentence.

LW, if you're reading these comments, I'd suggest googling "warning signs of an abuser dear abby" to pull up a frequently published and cited list of 15 warning signs. Maybe you've seen it in the past and that's what has you concerned since sign #1 is about pushing for immediate commitment. I remember seeing that column decades ago after being involved with an abusive person and I was stunned not only by how many of the signs were shown by that person fairly soon into the relationship, but also that some things I thought were just quirks of his (such as "sleep deprivation" in the context of verbal abuse) were actually well known (just not by me) flags of an abuser.

From the letter:
"but I have this gut feeling that these are red flags. And maybe they are or maybe it's just my anxiety? I find myself vacillating between elation and suspicion. ('He's such a great guy and he's really into me! But there has to be something wrong, a guy this great can't exist, no one should be this into me this fast.')"

It can be both. I don't think the age difference is a red flag, but the rapid emotional investment (if that's what "girlfriend" means to him) is. Still, thinking someone great can't exist or be into you very much IS a function of your own anxiety.

Agree entirely with EmmaLiz @15 and the red flag definition @40.

@44: Maybe something's wrong? Fine to treat that as a red flag, with the understanding that's a warning to be careful, not a conclusion that something's wrong.

I've never had a sexual relationship last more than six months, and I turn 33 in a couple months. I don't think I'm doing anything especially wrong - people seem to like me socially, I solicit and act on feedback with regards to sex, I've done interesting things and have interests (that aren't playing video games constantly), and I'm not chronically unemployed and seeking out people off of whom to mooch. I don't try to argue or otherwise coerce women out of their decisions when they break up with me, which may contribute (I know other people sometimes do), but I don't think that's a bad thing, since I'm not trying to date people who don't want to date me simply for the sake of having a relationship, and coercion is wrong.

Some people just don't find others with whom they are mutually compatible (at the point they meet, or at all) for long periods of time. I'd also consider it a red flag if someone's ONLY had longer-term relationships, as it suggests that ze clings too strongly too quickly to people with whom ze's not actually compatible, rather than approaching dating as the discovery process it is and being willing to end something that isn't working.