I’m a male, and I’ve thought of wearing a Roman collar on occasion to deal with this occurrence, if it wouldn’t be blasphemy to wear it.
In my experience, if I would say, “I’m religious” or “contemplating the priesthood”, it makes the girl more want to seduce me/defile me/lure me away from purity/God/et c. than one would think (common-sense would state that to a secular girl, who would be making the advances, saying “I’m strongly religious” and quoting the Bible and/or a Saint with attribution would turn them away: I only had to do that once before I was disabused of the notion), probably in a way analogous to many women are not attracted to a single man, but immediately become flirtatious or seductive if they see 1) another woman with that man or 2) a wedding ring.
The method I eventually learned was a completely blank look on the face, combined with intentionally “not getting” innuendos, followed shortly by ceasing communication entirely while giving a short look that says, “what are you talking about? I don’t get it.” That, in my experience, generally elicits either 1) a sigh and frustrated walk-away of some sort, or 2) a statement to the meaning of, “are you human? do you know what ‘sex’ is?”, followed by a walk-away, or 3) a “that man must be a gay” followed by a walk-away (I’d much rather be thought of or imagined as a gay, than be known in actuality to be a fornicator, much less an adulterer).
I’m sure such techniques could be adapted to a female, although I’m not sure with the same level of effectiveness, as, generally, I have seen, the man is supposed to play the role of initiator and pursuer, and the woman is supposed to play a pre-scripted role of feigning lack of interest or lack of understanding, much in the same way I described myself behaving above, and the man continues, and the woman eventually relents (or states up-front “you’re not my type” with disgust, or, if a slut, has all of the equally-slutty men chasing her without deciding one way or the other).
Essentially, all I do is exude complete lack of understanding (naivete? or studied asexuality: more the latter, it being somewhat hard to describe in words alone, it depending so much on non-verbal communication) and/or not play the man’s pre-scripted role; as only the most forward women approach a man in the first place, it is surprisingly effective (because, even though these woman take the man’s role in “initiative” - I suppose as part of “female liberation” - they, likely to do with the essential character of female-ness, do not continue to play through the aggressor/pursuer role as most men would). As a man, as well, much I can do by controlling my environment: outside of “hooking-up” environments (drinking establishments, dancing floors, et c.; places that I do not frequent) I find there are few women of the type who approach a man as I describe: thus, the occurrence is quite rare (albeit not completely absent).
I digress before I begin an amateur sociological analysis of courtship and/or “hookings-up” and gender roles and the stereotypy of men, women, and the celibate or non-sexual.
Or tell your friends and have “body guards”, i.e., hang out with more persons of your gender (and let them know you don’t want guys advances) and maybe they can help you!
