7 Reasons Women Reject Eager Men

January 1, 2013

new-years-day-soulmate-300dpi

Guys who actually like relationships and are interested in having a girlfriend find it very frustrating and baffling when women balk at early commitment. It’s a recurring theme among the guy readers here, and in a recent comment thread reader HanSolo explained it with a metaphor:

To 80% accuracy women are like cats. Cats are not like dogs. Cats do not want to mate with dogs. So, you need to show a little more catlike behavior at first to get that pussy (-cat) interested in you. Remember how cats come up and sit on the lap of the person who ignores it and only once it’s decided it wants you does it want to be petted and start receiving the more “doglike” affection.

Not all women are more catlike but to men who tend to go overboard with too much affection too soon (that act too much like affectionate dogs that run up to their master when she gets home and bury her with attention), keeping that exaggerated metaphor in mind will help them to treat them in a less smothering and more balanced way.

HanSolo doesn’t like it that women do not appreciate eager, unconditional affection from the start, and he doesn’t quite understand why this should be so, but he does accept it:

I have developed a more catlike nature. The dog in me is always longing to get out with the right woman though and cover her with affection.

I have so much love waiting for the right woman.

I feel like I have built a dam to hold it back but the rains keep falling and the reservoir is always brimming to the top.

I want to find the woman who wants my love. That thirsts for it. Whose heart is a desert. Who will open the spillways and let me love her fully. Who will love me back. Completely, fully, with abandon.

Until then, I fuck the occasional pussy and wait.

Women fantasize about finding that kind of love with a man, as the Romance Literature industry attests. However, it should be noted that in female fantasy, this level of commitment and devotion from a man is hard won, not a thing to be given away lightly. Women understand this instinctively – we can be extremely interested in a guy, pinching ourselves over our good fortune in attracting this gorgeous man, only to find him unappealing and yes, creepy, within a date or two. His eagerness to be immediately and deeply in love sounds alarm bells. 

Why do women discount and dismiss men who are eager to commit themselves right away?

1. Women understand the male role as the gatekeeper of commitment, just as we are the gatekeepers of sex.

In the same way that a man may question the long-term potential of a woman who grabs his junk on the first date, women are wary of men who are “emotionally promiscuous.” 

Certain it is I liked her, 
And boarded her i’ the wanton way of youth: 
She knew her distance and did angle for me,
Madding my eagerness with her restraint, 
As all impediments in fancy’s course 
Are motives of more fancy; and, in fine, 
Her infinite cunning, with her modern grace, 
Subdued me to her rate: she got the ring;

Shakespeare, All’s Well That Ends Well

2. Some people are serial monogamists – the minute one relationship ends, they’re auditioning everyone in their sphere as a potential replacement.

A fellow SM may happily make the deal quickly, but most people want to take their time selecting a relationship partner, and they want to be evaluated and chosen with the same care. 

3. A hasty attempt to elicit commitment has a vibe of desperation about it.

Like a used car salesman, he doesn’t want you to spend time looking under the hood, and he’s peevish if you want to think about the decision for a while. People with options tend to weigh them carefully, so rushing into a relationship implies a lack of options, and it carries the whiff of insecurity or fear.

4. Women expect to have to compete for a male, winning him over with our feminine wiles and enticing him into exclusivity as we successfully navigate his high standards.

Women do not want to be robbed of this opportunity to compete with other females. If there are no other females competing for him, a guy benefits from holding to his high standards in any case. Having low standards, or worse, none (like our friend in the comic above), is a turnoff to women. 

5. There’s an expression women share: “How you get him is how you lose him.”

It’s often applied to situations where a guy cheats on his gf and then dumps her for the new girl. It’s a bad way to start a new relationship, because New Girl is now with Cheater Boyfriend.

The concept applies here as well – if a guy falls for women at the drop of a hat, even if you think he’s great, you’re going to wonder when that may happen again. When he runs out for beer? When he sees his ex over the holidays? When an attractive new woman joins his firm? Guys who go all in too soon are impulsive guys, and impulsive guys are unpredictable guys. They’re flighty.

6. Delaying intense intimacy, whether emotional or physical, is a woman’s best method of filtering out insincere and manipulative men.

The “cost” of sex is much higher for women than it is for men. Every sexual encounter carries the risk of pregnancy. In addition, women are far more likely to contract STDs then men are. 

The cad’s tried and true mating strategy is lying about his feelings in order to get sex. He is willing to say almost anything to snag that innocent young thing who’s obviously looking for a boyfriend. Believing a man’s declarations of feeling when he’s known you a short time is a high risk move for women.  

In addition, narcissistic men with low empathy are very good at Instant Love and sweeping women off their feet. They know the script, and they know how to play their part in the movie that is their life. They’re strictly on a short-term timetable – if they take much time you’ll figure out they have nothing to offer. In and out is the best strategy, so they tend to declare their “feelings” very quickly.

7. We worry about buyer’s remorse.

When a man commits very soon, he is in the state of lust or infatuation. He is certainly creating his own idea of his beloved as perfection. Most of us know this will wear off. The more you have exalted us, the farther we will fall, and then you will not want us anymore.

I should note that there are exceptions to this general female “rule.” I have known several couples who met, had sex within hours, and essentially started living together that first night. Those relationships are extremely symbiotic, but they appear to suit some people very well. 

What have I missed? Girls, are you wary of guys who are “yours” from the first hello? Do you want to earn a man’s love? Or do you feel that’s just playing games, and you want him eager and willing from the start? What is the best way for a man who really does fall for you quickly to handle himself and increase your attraction to him?

 

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    ” Some people are serial monogamists – the minute one relationship ends, they’re auditioning everyone in their sphere as a potential replacement. ”

    This. There are men out there who have never lived without women. They go straight from their mother’s home into their first girlfriend’s apartment. They have never learned how to live alone or be alone with themselves. Never developed a solid relationship with the most important person in their lives – their own self.

    I have been the rebound relationship for three such men. One was living in a dangerous and depressing neighborhood with his mother after having broken a few years before with his girlfriend whom he shared an apartment with. He wanted to make a shift in his life and thought moving to the other side of the country (and in with me) would be the catalyst. He came on hot and heavy early on with declarations of love and life long plans and promises.

    “There’s an expression women share: “How you get him is how you lose him.”

    This. I lost the above guy via the internet, the same way I met him.
    He had moved out of my apartment and directly into the apartment of another woman he had met online during the time we were breaking up while still sharing the same space. During that time he had also made a trip to meet her in person and did not even bother to rent his own separate hotel room but stayed in her apartment. Then he returned from the trip and it was just a matter of weeks before he again moved a thousand miles across the country to live in a new girlfriend’s apartment.

    I don’t understand this need to jump from one relationship directly into another. How about putting on your big boy pants and learning to live on your own for once?

    • @The Rebound Girlfriend

      I don’t understand this need to jump from one relationship directly into another. How about putting on your big boy pants and learning to live on your own for once?

      Welcome, you’re a first-time commenter if I’m not mistaken.

      I agree. Both sexes do this, it’s a personality trait, I think. I think it has to do with a fear of being alone. Who wants the job of babysitter to someone who’s afraid of being independent?

  • Deli

    //I don’t understand this need to jump from one relationship directly into another. How about putting on your big boy pants and learning to live on your own for once?

    I would just like to point out, that this is the rare example of using “man-up” language, where it actually feels applicable and appropriate.

    Kudos.

    Although this overall post sounds so strangely familiar, that I am afraid it’s one of those gender-switch troll-posts (you know, those, where you substitute every instance of “man” with “woman” and visa versa to get the initial article).

    My apologies in case this is a post from an actual experience.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Totally from experience, and more than one. Of course I’m sure there are women who do that too but being a woman myself I wouldn’t be on the receiving end of it. Only men can tell those stories.

    Another one. A knew a couple who divorced. Before even moving out of the house the soon to be ex husband was trying to lure me in to a relationship with him. I was open to dating him but he was looking “for more”. We remained friends and toyed with the idea of dating once he moved out and got his own place. During that time he met another woman who was eager to move him into her place, which he did. I asked him why he didn’t just get his own place and experience what it was like to live all alone for the first time in his life. He said, “yeah, I probably need to experience that someday”.

    Some people are just afraid of being alone I guess.

  • “I don’t understand this need to jump from one relationship directly into another. How about putting on your big boy pants and learning to live on your own for once?”

    Why? The relationship’s over, why not just be happy the person you used to care so much about has found someone & isn’t heartbroken & suicidal?

    The ‘spending some alone time working on myself’ thing is very much a female pastime, & something women in general seem to be able to do far more happily than the majority of men, who simply aren’t wired that way. The kind of men who like being in a relationship often find it very hard to be alone later, once it fails. And, at this point in human history, the ones that DO decide to ‘work on being alone’ are much more likely to lose the taste for relationships at all & find themselves happier becoming either pickup artists or MGTOW, neither of which are likely to serve your greater interests.

    As with many sex differences, you don’t have to understand it, but you’ll feel a lot happier about the world if you let yourself accept it.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Why? The relationship’s over, why not just be happy the person you used to care so much about has found someone & isn’t heartbroken & suicidal? ”

    I was happy for him. He would not have been heartbroken or suicidal since our breakup was mutual. I still don’t understand this fear of getting your own place though.

  • Whoah… A page of extremes…

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    #4 is the thing I have hard time understanding. So we all know men are supposed to show interest and approach but then we’re supposed to play hard to get after we already show interest to basically play a meaningless game so someone can feel like they won the prize? Maybe I’m too far along on the autistic/omega/gamma/C.H.U.D./whatever spectrum to wrap my head around it all…..

    • So we all know men are supposed to show interest and approach but then we’re supposed to play hard to get after we already show interest to basically play a meaningless game so someone can feel like they won the prize?

      The point is, there should be many steps between approaching and offering commitment, and they should relate to your standards for being in a LTR. If you don’t have any, that’s a DLV, to put it mildly.

  • Sleeper

    \\I don’t understand this need to jump from one relationship directly into another. How about putting on your big boy pants and learning to live on your own for once?

    What about the guy that’s had his own place for years before the failed relationship and already knows what it’s like to live on his own? What sage advice do you have for him? Get a roommate? Not the same.

    You don’t have to understand it. If it’s not your cup of tea, don’t drink it.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “What about the guy that’s had his own place for years before the failed relationship and already knows what it’s like to live on his own?”

    What about him?

    “What sage advice do you have for him?”

    None. I merely repeated two points that I could relate to from this list and explained why, from personal experience, I could relate to them.

  • Maven7

    > 1. Women understand the male role as the gatekeeper of commitment, just as we are the gatekeepers of sex.
    I am jaded, but this is bs. Very few women are able to understand those concepts. Anyway, 90% of women do not guard their sex-card properly.

    > 2. Some people are serial monogamists – the minute one relationship ends, they’re auditioning everyone in their sphere as a potential replacement.
    What’s wrong with that?
    Women usually end one relationship while being in another. Sometimes, ever sperm-sharing. After one relationship, you should find another one by any means necessary.

    > 3. A hasty attempt to elicit commitment has a vibe of desperation about it.
    100% True

    > 4. Women expect to have to compete for a male, winning him over with our feminine wiles and enticing him into exclusivity as we successfully navigate his high standards.
    Again, BS – if the guy has fucked woman she already selected him. She gave up sex-card at this stage. If guy is eager to commit means he’s serious.

    > 5. There’s an expression women share: “How you get him is how you lose him.”
    no opinion

    > 6. Delaying intense intimacy, whether emotional or physical, is a woman’s best method of filtering out insincere and manipulative men.
    It’s the best method to betanize and fustrate normal guy. Cads will put her in rotation (as they have other chicks).

    > 7. We worry about buyer’s remorse.
    Another BS. Average guy is happy that his dry spell is over.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    SDS, “#4 is the thing I have hard time understanding. So we all know men are supposed to show interest and approach but then we’re supposed to play hard to get after we already show interest to basically play a meaningless game so someone can feel like they won the prize? Maybe I’m too far along on the autistic/omega/gamma/C.H.U.D./whatever spectrum to wrap my head around it all…..”

    I agree. I also don’t understand it. Both men and women are taught to play a cat and mouse game of hard to get. Women are taught to withhold sex until a certain number of dates have been had or a certain amount of time has passed just as men are taught to withhold emotional commitment. I guess this is so neither of us will be seen as easy and therefore undervalued?

  • Maven7

    As stated above – only 3rd point is valid IMHO.
    Being too eager to commit implies neediness. It’s just another hurdle, we have to learn to manage to make woman’s hamster happy.

    Anyway, my asian date fclosed. I proposed her exclusivity – if she’s smart she accepts. Otherwise, I continue building soft harem.

  • “Women are taught to withhold sex until a certain number of dates have been had or a certain amount of time has passed just as men are taught to withhold emotional commitment.”

    This might be quibbling, but I really don’t think men are taught to withhold emotional commitment, I think it comes naturally, just as it comes naturally to women not to immediately have sex with every man who will let them. The sexes have different reproductive drives & goals, & different dangers to be instinctively wary of: for women the price of sex (for all human history pre-1960’s) was debilitating & possibly life-threatening pregnancy, so needed to be entered into carefully. For men, careless emotional commitment meant being trapped into a life he didn’t choose, providing for a woman who might not be right for him, & her offspring (who may not even be his) too. It’s all just nature, & trying to shame men into behaving more like women won’t make anybody happy in the long run.

    • @Byron

      It’s all just nature, & trying to shame men into behaving more like women won’t make anybody happy in the long run.

      I don’t understand this comment. How does this post shame men?

  • Sassy6519

    Oh boy, the comments on this thread already……..(shaking my head).

    • @Sassy

      Oh boy, the comments on this thread already……..(shaking my head).

      Yeah. “WomenAreGutlessCowards” is a problem. What is wrong with these people? This kind of commentary is worthless and a bit alarming. The internet is not your shrink, dude. Get a grip.

  • Sassy6519

    I think this was addressed in the other thread, but I will throw in my two cents anyway.

    I’m always a bit caught off guard whenever a guy wants to have the “DTR” conversation on the 2nd-4th date. Doing so just strikes me as way too soon. I still barely know the guy at that point, and I don’t think that such conversations should be forced upon me.

    I can understand a man liking me, and perhaps having somewhat of a hard time containing his excitement, but it’s still a bit unsettling.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “This might be quibbling, but I really don’t think men are taught to withhold emotional commitment, I think it comes naturally, just as it comes naturally to women not to immediately have sex with every man who will let them. The sexes have different reproductive drives & goals, & different dangers to be instinctively wary of: for women the price of sex (for all human history pre-1960′s) was debilitating & possibly life-threatening pregnancy, so needed to be entered into carefully. ”

    Right. But now we have condoms and other forms of birth control so the pregnancy scare is not anywhere near the amount of risk anymore and we women are still advised to withhold sex, even if we may really be sexually drawn to a man during the first, second or third date. Care to explain that?

  • taterearl

    1. Women understand the male role as the gatekeeper of commitment, just as we are the gatekeepers of sex.

    Really…if women understood that then they wouldn’t be riding the carousel.

    2. Some people are serial monogamists – the minute one relationship ends, they’re auditioning everyone in their sphere as a potential replacement.

    Projection…that is a woman thing. Sometimes they don’t even wait for the relationship to end before they do this.

    3. A hasty attempt to elicit commitment has a vibe of desperation about it.

    Just like giving it away on the first date reeks of desperation.

    4. Women expect to have to compete for a male, winning him over with our feminine wiles and enticing him into exclusivity as we successfully navigate his high standards.

    There’s the truth.

    5. There’s an expression women share: “How you get him is how you lose him.”

    If by getting him you sex him up early. If you get him by being feminine you’ll make it harder to lose him.

    6. Delaying intense intimacy, whether emotional or physical, is a woman’s best method of filtering out insincere and manipulative men.

    And vice versa.

    7. We worry about buyer’s remorse.

    Then stop worrying because you are not the buyer…you are the product. If that product is shiny, attractive, has no previous owners, and is feminine…you’ll get the high SMV guys. If you’ve ruined your value then don’t be surprised when the only guy who can afford you is of poor SMV.

    • @taterearl

      Really…if women understood that then they wouldn’t be riding the carousel.

      Only 10-15% are.

      Projection…that is a woman thing. Sometimes they don’t even wait for the relationship to end before they do this.

      I have witnessed this first hand many times. There are guys who are known as serial monogamists – all the girls know who they are. They are never without a gf.

      Just like giving it away on the first date reeks of desperation.

      Agreed, and I drew that parallel in the post.

      If you get him by being feminine you’ll make it harder to lose him.

      If you get him cheating, you lose him cheating. If you get him b/c he is impulsive and not selective, you lose him the same way. It’s not about female seduction, it’s about male character.

      And vice versa.

      Sure, why not? If you want to delay sex to make sure a woman isn’t after you just for your body, that is your right.

      Then stop worrying because you are not the buyer…you are the product.

      Um, the comment was about buyer’s remorse. This response is not intelligent.

  • Ted D

    Sassy – “I’m always a bit caught off guard whenever a guy wants to have the “DTR” conversation on the 2nd-4th date. Doing so just strikes me as way too soon. I still barely know the guy at that point, and I don’t think that such conversations should be forced upon me.”

    Why is it too soon to agree to NOT see anyone else while you see if things can work out? I’m 100% sure I would not bother investing an ounce of energy on a woman that insists on keeping her “options” open. If we are going to date, we are going to date exclusively or not at all. Asking for exlcusivity doesn’t mean I love you or think I’m falling in love, it means I’m considering the idea of falling in love. I won’t even try to connect on more than a superficial level until exclusivity is agreed on. Most woman balk at this, and I think it can be a losing move for them. I’ve had enough takers in my lifetime to spend most of my adult life happily with a mate.

    Spinning plates is BS to me. I date 1 on 1 only, so we get exclusive early or never. Yep, I’m asking her to take a chance, but no less chance than I’m taking myself.

  • Ted D

    “4. Women expect to have to compete for a male, winning him over with our feminine wiles and enticing him into exclusivity as we successfully navigate his high standards.”

    This is so silly to me. “Win me over” with feminine wiles? Sure, those feminine wiles may get me attracted to you, but I promise they WILL NOT “win me over” at all. If I’m thinking LTR, it is your character, morality, and loyalty that I’m looking at, not how hot or feminine you are. The idea that a woman can “win” a man over with her magic vagina is so blue pill it’s funny.

    That being said, most guys are still plugged in, so that magic vagina may work wonders with them. Bad news is, most women won’t be too happy with what they catch that way long term.

  • ‘Right. But now we have condoms and other forms of birth control so the pregnancy scare is not anywhere near the amount of risk anymore and we women are still advised to withhold sex, even if we may really be sexually drawn to a man during the first, second or third date. Care to explain that?’

    Yes. Evolution. Millions of years of evolution. The invention of the pill two generations ago doesn’t wipe out hardwired behavior overnight. Also, promiscuous behaviour in women is a huge red flag & turn-off to men relationship-wise (though not for short-term sex). Since women more often than not are seeking relationships rather than one-night stands, & since men simply ARE more naturally cautious to commit, as Susan has convincingly pointed out countless times, even for a woman with a purseful of condoms, it still makes for a better female dating strategy to see whether a man looks like he is going to stick around first.

    There’s other issues, too, such as the female disapproval of ‘easy’ women taking ‘their’ men & so on, but I think the above answer more pertinent.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Why is it too soon to agree to NOT see anyone else while you see if things can work out?”

    Personally I’m fine with that. What I’m not fine with is declarations of love and talk of moving in together, even getting married, during the initial period of dating and getting to know one another.

    In the first example I gave he did just that. Then when we broke up but he was still living in my apartment, he did the same thing with the next woman he met online and flew out to see. With the added caveat of, “I never loved her but I’m totally in love with you”. She emailed me and told me that she was thrown off kilter by this but she agreed to give the relationship a try when upon dropping him off at the airport for his return flight home (to my apartment) he literally cried when she told him that they should “just be friends for now”.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Ted D

    The problem is as follows.

    Not too long ago, the men and women on here had a lengthy discussion about women supposedly entering into relationships that they knew had expiration dates, or that they were unsure about being in. The men clearly stated that they would rather be single or in FWB relationships than to be in bf/gf relationships that don’t have long-term potential. Do you remember that conversation?

    Now, how exactly is a woman supposed to rationally understand/judge whether or not a man is a long-term potential candidate if she is being pressured into exclusivity from the very beginning? I’m sorry, but the men can’t have it both ways. If my goal is to meet a man that I can see myself marrying and staying married to for the rest of my life (hopefully), there is no way in hell that I would be able to make that sort of judgement call 2-4 dates in. I don’t see the point in being pressured to “go all in” so early.

    I’m actually tackling this very monster right now. The guy I’ve been dating has already asked me to be his girlfriend. We haven’t even dated for a month yet. It’s still during the initial stages. I do like him very much, based off of the information I have gathered so far, but I don’t see a point in making things official yet. I don’t want to label the relationship now and find a major deal-breaker in the near future. What would my options be then? I could break up with him, but then I would be viewed as fickle by men for easily breaking a “bf/gf” relationship.

    I conceded a little by agreeing to not go on dates with anyone else, for the time being. I don’t want to make things official yet, and he seemed to be okay with those terms. I plan on continuing to go on dates with him, and I also plan on continuing to screen him for compatibility aspects. If things do go south, I imagine that the situation will go smoother this way. I would not be his girlfriend yet, and he wouldn’t have unnecessarily high hopes that are dashed.

    • @Sassy

      don’t want to label the relationship now and find a major deal-breaker in the near future. What would my options be then? I could break up with him, but then I would be viewed as fickle by men for easily breaking a “bf/gf” relationship.

      One need only refer back to your previous relationship. Some very troubling and alarming things occurred only after you had agree to be his girlfriend! What is the rush?

  • Ted D

    Sassy – if we were on date 4 tonight, and I asked you to “go exclusive”, I certainly wouldn’t expect you to know if you wanted to marry me yet. What I’m asking for is your undivided consideration as your mate from that point on until we commit or decide it won’t work.

    I just don’t understand why so many of you seem to equate exclusive with pre-engagement type relationships. I simply don’t want you dating around with other guys while you are dating me, which by definition means exclusive. I don’t expect you to love me by date four, but until you decide you don’t I’d prefer I be the only guy in the current running.

    Yes that means “locked down” but not necessarily head over heels in love.

  • sestamibi

    Why so much verbage? 38 Special got it as far back as 1981?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJtf7R_oVaw

  • Anne

    I very strongly agree with #5. It’s actually a problem – I dated a serial monogamist once, and now I am extremely wary.

    I don’t see how men find it “frustrating” if women don’t respond to full-on romance right away. Everybody’s romantic on the first dates. He can be sweet, affectionate, personal, intimate, serious and mature on a 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th date. A man showing these attributes means nothing at all.
    If he offers commitment – the sooner he does, the sooner he can leave. A 1 month relationship is still easier to bail on than a 4 month one. I thought it was too good to be true when my ex wanted to meet my family 1 month in. And that’s exactly what it was.

  • I think humans in general, not only women, tend to pay more attention to something/someone if it has a little uncertainty attached to it. (By analogy, the human visual system, and also that of most animals, tends to notice moving objects more than still backgrounds.) If you’re not quite sure about how interested someone is in you, you’ll be thinking “*(s)he loves me, (sh)he loves me not” in a way you won’t with someone you’re sure is in the bag.

    The effect exists for both sexes, but seems stronger for women. Here’s an interesting passage by Linda Niemann (which I might have quoted before)…

    “But women need to get to that acrophobic edge and suffer there for a while. Men don’t seem to understand this about sex. They rush into it, and sex is over before the woman has even noticed that they are there. It’s like the sun waking up a sleepy earth. It doesn’t just turn the lights on. It sneaks up on the earth, lights a subtle fire somewhere else, makes the earth turn over in her sleep and face him. He throws a few drops of red into the inky waters of he sky, and lightens the palette with orchestral resonance. He also makes it colder. The earth realizes she wants to warm up. Unknowingly she starts to desire the sun. She creates the sun in her mind and then there he is, her creation, child and lover, returning from the dream of her sleep. Who would resist such a lover?”

    Obviously, Niemann is talking here specifically about sex rather than about a relationship in general, but the same principle seems to apply.

    (The Niemann quote is–oddly enough–from her book about her experiences working as a railroad brakeman; I reviewed it here)

    • @david foster

      I love that Niemann quote! I think it’s hardly surprising, when you think of what is really at stake when two people have sex, or should be. The woman should require considerable efforts on the part of the male for sex. The fact that this is usually no longer the case is the strange part.

  • OffTheCuff

    Double troll attack, PJ and Piper. Well, this new year was ok for a few minutes…

    Sassy: wow. Your dudes kinda are lame. Low betas in alpha clothes or something.

  • OffTheCuff

    Anne: “If he offers commitment – the sooner he does, the sooner he can leave.”

    Money quote!

    Withhold commitment. Have multiple prospects, or at the very least don’t deny that you don’t, until requested to stop.

    The women demand it.

  • Sassy6519

    @ OffTheCuff

    wow. Your dudes kinda are lame. Low betas in alpha clothes or something.

    It can seem that way sometimes. The strange thing is that he seems like a typical “alpha” in many other regards. For some reason, however, the men I date are always really quick to try to initiate the bf/gf talk. I am a bit flattered by it, to be honest, but it’s also a bit overwhelming.

    I think the problem is that most men have a very hard time maintaining a strong frame around me, with regards to commitment.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I thought it was too good to be true when my ex wanted to meet my family 1 month in. And that’s exactly what it was.”

    Interesting use of terminology. I used the very same words when “it sounds too good to be true” when he first started outlining to me our future (before we had even physically met). He responded by saying “women always say things are too good to be true when they are true but can’t or don’t want to believe it, or they don’t want them to be true”.

    I knew something was up when I offered him the oppurtunity to have a long distance relationship with me as well as date other women in his locality and he refused, demanding exclusivity. What kind of person refuses such an offer of the best of both worlds?

    • @The Rebound Girlfriend

      I knew something was up when I offered him the oppurtunity to have a long distance relationship with me as well as date other women in his locality and he refused, demanding exclusivity. What kind of person refuses such an offer of the best of both worlds?

      Why would you even offer that? What was your long-term goal?

  • OffTheCuff

    Sassy: “Not too long ago, the men and women on here had a lengthy discussion about women supposedly entering into relationships that they knew had expiration dates, or that they were unsure about being in. The men clearly stated that they would rather be single or in FWB relationships than to be in bf/gf relationships that don’t have long-term potential.”

    The differenc is subtle but very important.

    Of course you are not psychic, and might be undecided, that’s fine.

    What we were objecting to you is the case where you happen KNOW it doesn’t have long-term potential and just want a temporary boyfriend.

    Sassy: “,how exactly is a woman supposed to rationally understand/judge whether or not a man is a long-term potential candidate if she is being pressured into exclusivity from the very beginning?”

    See above. Not knowing is fine. Knowing that there’s some sort of trivial end condition like “until I’m bored” or “until I graduate”, the you should just call a spade a spade and be FWB. Monogamy has opportunity costs to a man, like sex has to a woman.

  • Mike C

    I think the problem is that most men have a very hard time maintaining a strong frame around me, with regards to commitment.

    This could be the case. Judging from the totality of your comments, I assume the following 3 items are true:

    1. You are very physically attractive
    2. You exude a powerful sexual presence and sensuality
    3. You are a bit walled off emotionally

    Even the typical alpha might have problems maintaining a strong frame and get a bit “weak-kneed” around you. I think one thing few women understand is that most men are 1000x more intimidated by a very beautiful, sexually powerful woman than one trying to ape male behaviors with pseudo-aggression, and aggressive verbal snark and sarcasm

  • Mike C

    4. Women expect to have to compete for a male, winning him over with our feminine wiles and enticing him into exclusivity as we successfully navigate his high standards.

    Translation to direct guy-enese language:

    Internalize that you the guy are THE PRIZE. Make the girl chase you.

    • Internalize that you the guy are THE PRIZE. Make the girl chase you.

      Yup. “Chase” is probably too strong a word, but you definitely want the female to come to you. And that will not happen if you are smothering her with attention.

  • INTJ

    Wonder what SayWhaat has to say about this:

    To 80% accuracy women are like cats. Cats are not like dogs. Cats do not want to mate with dogs. So, you need to show a little more catlike behavior at first to get that pussy (-cat) interested in you. Remember how cats come up and sit on the lap of the person who ignores it and only once it’s decided it wants you does it want to be petted and start receiving the more “doglike” affection.

    Not all women are more catlike but to men who tend to go overboard with too much affection too soon (that act too much like affectionate dogs that run up to their master when she gets home and bury her with attention), keeping that exaggerated metaphor in mind will help them to treat them in a less smothering and more balanced way.

  • Mike C

    I don’t see how men find it “frustrating” if women don’t respond to full-on romance right away.

    Anne, this is because most men are raised and operate from a perspective of “romantic idealism”. That is the defacto position for a blue-pill guy.

  • Mike C

    Sestamibi,

    Good tune. An old geezer like myself remembers hearing that one on that old FM radio thingy. 🙂

    BTW, saw This is 40 last night with the fiancee for a low-key New Years. Very funny movie, and one of those movies that is fascinating to watch and analyze from an unplugged perspective. The Mom and Wife is about to turn 40 and desperate to maintain that she is 38. The husband and father is turning 40 as well. Megan Fox is the hottie working for her.

    In one scene, at the birthday party, the husband and his friend are staring at Megan Fox’s character while the two wives look at them and state “They look like a couple of pedophiles”. It is meant jokingly no doubt, but it is an example of where male “base/feral” nature is put on full display in popular media with a pejorative comment. There is actually a comparable scene with the wife going out for a “girls night” but the context is different. Very subtle stuff that 99.99% of the population wouldn’t catch. Interestingly, you see some Game references as the physical trainer character actually “negs” Megan Fox’s character saying she is very beautiful but only a 6 that he could make a 9.

    Very funny movie with plenty of fodder for any student of intergender dynamics.

  • Wow… I’d never really thought about point #1 before but it makes so much sense. I can already feel that idea taking root in my mind.

    Great post.

  • Mike C

    I’m actually tackling this very monster right now. The guy I’ve been dating has already asked me to be his girlfriend. We haven’t even dated for a month yet. It’s still during the initial stages. I do like him very much, based off of the information I have gathered so far, but I don’t see a point in making things official yet. I don’t want to label the relationship now and find a major deal-breaker in the near future. What would my options be then? I could break up with him, but then I would be viewed as fickle by men for easily breaking a “bf/gf” relationship.

    I conceded a little by agreeing to not go on dates with anyone else, for the time being. I don’t want to make things official yet, and he seemed to be okay with those terms. I plan on continuing to go on dates with him, and I also plan on continuing to screen him for compatibility aspects. If things do go south, I imagine that the situation will go smoother this way. I would not be his girlfriend yet, and he wouldn’t have unnecessarily high hopes that are dashed.

    Sassy,

    I think you are taking the right approach here. As I alluded to above, I think your challenge might be in dealing with guys who may always be in front of where you are at in terms of emotional escalation because of your characteristics and personality, and not allowing that to make you sour on them/lose attraction too early.

  • Mike C

    Wow… I’d never really thought about point #1 before but it makes so much sense. I can already feel that idea taking root in my mind.

    Great post.

    I think this a good post as well because for the guys paying attention it gives great insight into the female mind and psychological process. Whether you agree or disagree is beside the point. It is what it is.

    On the flip side, women have to realize the “fried ice” part of this as well. Very often, “eager” men are the guys who are also bringing to the table the panoply of beta/comfort traits that Susan advocates women select for. The “eagerness” is often inextricably linked with those other traits. Part of this means women need to cut those guys some slack otherwise they will end up selecting the guys who have mastered the PLI.

    • Very often, “eager” men are the guys who are also bringing to the table the panoply of beta/comfort traits that Susan advocates women select for. The “eagerness” is often inextricably linked with those other traits.

      I have never advocated selecting purely for comfort traits. I believe the best male partners display a balance of alpha and beta traits. Once you’ve crossed the line into supplication and “eager beaver” behavior, you’ve gone way too heavy on the comfort traits and lost all sense of dominance. This does not work, as there is a baseline level of dominance that most women will require.

      There is no one magic formula. The ideal mix of traits will vary a great deal among individuals.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I think one thing few women understand is that most men are 1000x more intimidated by a very beautiful, sexually powerful woman than one trying to ape male behaviors with pseudo-aggression, and aggressive verbal snark and sarcasm.”

    Most women understand that. But neither type is trying to purposely intimidate men.

    Another commenter wrote, “As a general rule, the readiness with which an idea is accepted is directly proportional to the attractiveness of its speaker.”

    Average looking people are both impressed and intimidated by physical attractiveness.

  • OffTheCuff

    Since there is no legal commitment, what does “commitment” mean? Is it merely an offer of not entertaining other dating prospects? Total monogamy? Sexually monogamous, but free to kiss others? Declaration of the L word? Something else?

    What does bf/gf mean? Introducing your lover to your social circle? Facebook? Close friends in person? Family?

    A lot of old fashioned people have this obsolete script in their heads, perhaps a holdover from childish expectations: meet a person, go on date with a single prospect, some physical intimacy, bf/gf status, more intimacy, then sex. To further compound the antiquity of it, they actually would never consider going on dates with more than one person concurrently – you rule out one person and say goodbye, before going on a date with another. Clearly a bad idea…

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    ” To further compound the antiquity of it, they actually would never consider going on dates with more than one person concurrently – you rule out one person and say goodbye, before going on a date with another.”

    I think that’s a recent thing actually. From all my talks with old people who were dating in the 1940s, 50s or 60s, they dated people concurrently until they really started liking one of them and then asked them to go what they called “steady”.

    “Why would you even offer that? What was your long-term goal?”

    We were long distance. The relationship consisted of emails and long telephone calls at the time I offered that.

    • I think that’s a recent thing actually. From all my talks with old people who were dating in the 1940s, 50s or 60s, they dated people concurrently until they really started liking one of them and then asked them to go what they called “steady”.

      I can confirm that this was the norm until 1980 at least. After that, I went off the market, but until then we dated a variety of people without guilt until we agreed to be exclusive. And FTR, dating a variety of people might well include making out with two different guys on a weekend.

  • Mike C

    I believe the best male partners display a balance of alpha and beta traits. Once you’ve crossed the line into supplication and “eager beaver” behavior, you’ve gone way too heavy on the comfort traits and lost all sense of dominance. This does not work, as there is a baseline level of dominance that most women will require.

    There is no one magic formula. The ideal mix of traits will vary a great deal among individuals.

    No disagreement from me. I’m not sure you grok the difficulty of getting the calibration right and getting enough balance to walk that tightrope correctly without falling into the pit below. That comes with experience and practice.

  • Unending Improvement (@UnendImprov)

    @Susan 44

    He’s a Manospambot.

    Lot’s of them running around, that one was probably pointed here by someone else.

    • He’s a Manospambot.

      Lot’s of them running around, that one was probably pointed here by someone else.

      I get a lot of those 🙁

      It’s odd – often these guys spend a great deal of time typing and articulating their thoughts, only to be put into mod or spammed. Why bother? It must be cathartic in some way but I am not here to nurse the men upchucking the red pill.

  • Jacob Ian Stalk

    As I read through this, I found myself marvelling at it’s clarity, reasonableness and sensitivity…until I scrolled through in my mind the 50 or so women with whom I’m in close regular contact and considered whether or not her behaviour corresponded to this sort of thinking. The women I know cover the full range of looks, intelligence, sexiness, achievement, manners, joie de vivre, family background, race and religion. Guess what I came up with? Only one. That’s right, one woman only who seemed to behave like this. Interestingly, she is the most teflon-coated woman of the lot. Untouchable. She’s attractive, intelligent, temperate, accomplished, well-respected…and single and childless at 40.

    This leads me to the conclusion that while Susan’s list is interesting from a sociological point of view, it doesn’t describe the behaviour of any but the most idealistically self-focused woman and is useless as the basis for relationship advice. There appears to be no room for idiosyncratic behaviour and its network of interwoven actionary-reactionary consequences, which is what relationship seems to be all about. Relationship is not about finding a partner that fits and then living a static life. It’s about finding someone who can tolerate our shit and can respond well to the changing dynamics of life and relationships.

    So, while this list seems well-crafted, sensitive and insightful, it is at its core inhumane. It’s actually a very good example of how the intelligentsia (using academia, science and statistics) create impossible-to-meet and often brutal expectations in human relationships. It’s a common phenomenon amongst those who form models of human behaviour chiefly around scientific papers, statistics and the lowing herd.

    So it goes with much of what Susan writes here. Most of it is intelligent and well-considered, with many little tidbits that make perfect sense to most people. But it is typically an idealised, sterilised version of humanity that tends towards the static. It fails as advice because when we adopt idealised notions of humanity idiosyncratic behaviour tends to fall away from our perceptions, and with it the personalities and individuality that drives our interactions with others in the real world. While we’re attracted to perfections, we tend to love people because of their imperfections.

    Readers of Susan’s list should also consider built-in redundancy. When anti-idiosyncratic models of human behaviour are used as the basis for advice to nameless, countless others, widespread failure in practice is guaranteed (for much the same reason anti-biotics and predictive stock market algorithms tend to fail). Not immediately, but inevitably. There are no normal people in practice. No, not even Susan.

    Grace, forgiveness, mercy, kindness, compassion are better principles to follow when seeking a partner.

    • @Jacob

      As I read through this, I found myself marvelling at it’s clarity, reasonableness and sensitivity…until I scrolled through in my mind the 50 or so women with whom I’m in close regular contact and considered whether or not her behaviour corresponded to this sort of thinking.

      You are in close regular contact with 50 single women? How would you describe their behavior in variance to this post?

      Relationship is not about finding a partner that fits and then living a static life. It’s about finding someone who can tolerate our shit and can respond well to the changing dynamics of life and relationships.

      I find this a very sad and unfortunate description of what relationships are about. IMO, the greatest human desire is to be known. It is the desire for real connection, which implies being accepted once we are known. Perhaps even loved.

      Seeking someone to “tolerate our shit” is a very one-sided and narcissistic approach to relating to others. I don’t know what you mean by “responding well” to changing dynamics, but I fear you mean that you seek women willing to tolerate various forms of emotional abuse.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Jacob, yours is the best and most insightful comment regarding online relationship pontification that I have ever read.

    “So, while this list seems well-crafted, sensitive and insightful, it is at its core inhumane. It’s actually a very good example of how the intelligentsia (using academia, science and statistics) create impossible-to-meet and often brutal expectations in human relationships. It’s a common phenomenon amongst those who form models of human behaviour chiefly around scientific papers, statistics and the lowing herd.”

    This. So true.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I find this a very sad and unfortunate description of what relationships are about. IMO, the greatest human desire is to be known. It is the desire for real connection, which implies being accepted once we are known. Perhaps even loved.

    Seeking someone to “tolerate our shit” is a very one-sided and narcissistic approach to relating to others. I don’t know what you mean by “responding well” to changing dynamics, but I fear you mean that you seek women willing to tolerate various forms of emotional abuse.”

    I didn’t get this from Jacob’s post at all. I thought he articulated well that humans are complex and hence relationships also have their complexity.
    For example, a man escalating emotional exclusivity early on might appear needy and suspicious, and he very well might be, but he might not be as well. Similarly a woman escalating sexually early on might be promiscuous and untrustworthy but she might not be as well. We can’t know until we know and that means being able to consider possibilities beyond stereotypes.

  • Mike C

    Seeking someone to “tolerate our shit” is a very one-sided and narcissistic approach to relating to others. I don’t know what you mean by “responding well” to changing dynamics, but I fear you mean that you seek women willing to tolerate various forms of emotional abuse.”

    I didn’t get this from Jacob’s post at all. I thought he articulated well that humans are complex and hence relationships also have their complexity.

    Susan can ascertain his true intent and thoughts. This is an ability that NFs have (Myers-Brigg)

  • J

    I think the simplest reason that women distrust immediate declarations of love is that they are coming from people who don’t really know them. Real love takes knowledge of a person’s strengths and faults. I really wanted to know that DH had noticed, understood and accepted all my BS before I could accept “I love you,” and I think he wanted the same. You can be infatuated early on, but real love takes time. Someone who doesn’t realize that is immature at best.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “You can be infatuated early on, but real love takes time.”

    This. But its not the same with sexual attraction so I don’t understand why withholding sex til a certain date number or amount of time spent together, even when you really want to have it, is still advised in this age of effective birth control.

  • Mike C

    This. But its not the same with sexual attraction so I don’t understand why withholding sex til a certain date number or amount of time spent together, even when you really want to have it, is still advised in this age of effective birth control.

    Rebound Girl,

    I suspect you are very new to these discussions, and how are evolutionary biological wiring plays into our sexuality. From one perspective on a purely rational level you are correct to question why this is the case.

    “Easy” women trigger a visceral instinct in men not to commit to a long-term relationship. That isn’t to say that instinct can’t be overridden in some cases. What is triggered in men is the fear of cheating/cuckolding down the road. The “easier” a woman is sexually, the more the instinct is triggered that she may cheat with another man at some point. Whether this is logical or rational is immaterial….it is what hundreds of thousands of years programmed into men. Women have their own set of biological programming which isn’t logical or rational in today’s modern society but it is what it is.

    Generally speaking, many men sort women into two ladders, the long-term relationship ladder or short-term sex ladder. If you are a relationship oriented woman you don’t want to get kicked onto the short-term sex ladder. Women have their own ladder, the “Let’s Just be Friends” ladder, and the “I am attracted to you” Ladder.

    There is a lot more complexity to it than what I just outlined, and these subjects have been discussed here extensively. You may want to check out the archives for relevant posts and discussion.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Thank you for taking the time to explain that. “From one perspective on a purely rational level you are correct to question why this is the case.” I am frequently frustrated with the lack of logic around me which makes me sort of a loner. I have a low tolerance for inauthenticity which makes cat and mouse games and playing hard to get a major deal breaker from my side and I also don’t want to be burdened with having to play games myself.

  • Unending Improvement (@UnendImprov)

    @ Susan 56: “It must be cathartic in some way but I am not here to nurse the men upchucking the red pill.”

    There is a lot of societal bullshit fed to men that needs cut through, but the problem with the “Manosphere” is their conclusions oftentimes simply do not reflect the truth about sex or relationships.

    For their professed belief in Evo Psych, there isn’t really much they actually derive from it.

    “Red Pill Wisdom” as it is often called, relies on caricatures of Evo Psych as ridiculous as any strawman used by Marcotte or Watson.

  • Mike C

    I am frequently frustrated with the lack of logic around me which makes me sort of a loner. I have a low tolerance for inauthenticity which makes cat and mouse games and playing hard to get a major deal breaker from my side and I also don’t want to be burdened with having to play games myself.

    RG,

    I’d bet good money you are either a INTJ or ISTJ. If you are an INTJ, that makes you a rarity amongst women. My fiancee is an INTJ and has a low threshold for game playing. When I met her, I realized I didn’t need to “run much Game”. There are guys out there who will appreciate your personality traits but you probably will have to screen hard for people who like drama and game playing to get them out of the picture quickly.

  • Maven7

    “I have never advocated selecting purely for comfort traits. I believe the best male partners display a balance of alpha and beta traits. Once you’ve crossed the line into supplication and “eager beaver” behavior, you’ve gone way too heavy on the comfort traits and lost all sense of dominance. This does not work, as there is a baseline level of dominance that most women will require.”

    So now we also have not only learn how to game chicks into bed, but also how to commit to them in a way that hamster is happy…

    Girls, I have a question: assuming that average guy has no game at all, how would you expect him to go trough all this hurdles?

    • @Maven7

      Girls, I have a question: assuming that average guy has no game at all, how would you expect him to go trough all this hurdles?

      The answer is Inner Game. Work on yourself without the goal of trying to game chicks into bed. When you feel good about where you are in your life, the self-confidence that is required for mating will be real rather than cocky bluster. Inner Game is a lot more work, but you can’t get more than casual without it, so if you want an LTR Game alone is not going to cut it.

  • VJ

    I’m sorry but “From all my talks with old people who were dating in the 1940s, 50s or 60s”…

    1.) The guys recalled their cars far more fondly than any of the women they dated. With better and more accurate descriptions too.

    2.) For the women it was often what they wore, or what the films were playing at the time.

    Back to the essential question, ‘Why women reject eager men’, some more thoughts:

    1.) He does not know me, and thus can not be serious. (This may be the most naive yet honest response).

    2.) Despite everything you’ve heard, there are just some dudes who are consistently more romantic than women typically give them credit for. This is especially true for married dudes, BTW.

    3.) Bad prior experiences with some grifters. (‘Nuff said).

    4.) Bad experiences with the ‘incurable romantic types’ who can and might be ready to commit to ‘anyone & everyone’. This can happen, but it’s not as common as frequently imagined.

    5.) Most educated women today do not want any sort of ‘early commitment’, even from truly worthy candidates. Even a highly educated, tall, handsome & studly, kind & decent, well employed heir of a large fortune would be ‘blown off’ most of the time by any sort of desirable middling lass who’s determined to get her degrees/MBA by 30 etc. I’ve seen it happen to friends. Conversely, when they’re ‘finally ready for commitment’ many women will all but ignore most of the viable candidates found all around them for pursuit of the small slice of worthies making up the upper 10-20% of all possible ‘matches’. (Here it’s actually the upper 5% much of the time). That’s the ‘alpha’ fantasy, that all such women will automatically enjoy a highly satisfying hypergamous match of their choosing, exactly when & where they desire it. It’s a delicious but highly delusional fantasy that not even Grimm’s Fairytales would choreograph well or completely.

    6.) Because they’re seemingly wholly unaware of real social trends. Fewer males of similar ages now express desires to be married ‘soon’, while the proportion of women saying this is on the increase recently. Why? Various complicated and ongoing economic factors play a huge role here. If you have a reasonably ‘viable’ prospect who after a month or so seems still ‘eager’? Well you might ask all the usual questions (inexperienced? recently dumped? Divorced? Widowed? deluded? insane?), and/or you can chase away your relative good fortune too.

    7.) Still for many women, the 20’s are their ‘play time’. Time to ‘explore their sexuality’ in various serial relationships of ‘no mean importance’, but were ‘highly entertaining’ just the same. Chasing the studs/alphas/big dicks until tired, worn out, or begetting just enough kids to slow you down somewhat. They’ll only be open to and looking for ‘commitment’ after this period of ‘experimentation’ and yes even ‘trial marriages’ that they’ll deny have any sort of bearing on the willingness of others to commit to them.

    8.) So call it a mismatch of time, effort, heart, devotion, and attention to others and potential future families. You don’t get a bottoming out of both fertility and marriage rates to the lowest levels seen in 80 years by saying ‘Yes’, or being exactly open to too many possibilities beyond self gratification or self involvement. Why listen to such entreaties? They’re by in large not interested.

    Just some more thoughts. Cheers, ‘VJ’

    • @VJ

      Even a highly educated, tall, handsome & studly, kind & decent, well employed heir of a large fortune would be ‘blown off’ most of the time by any sort of desirable middling lass who’s determined to get her degrees/MBA by 30 etc.

      That might be a good definition of insanity.

      Conversely, when they’re ‘finally ready for commitment’ many women will all but ignore most of the viable candidates found all around them for pursuit of the small slice of worthies making up the upper 10-20% of all possible ‘matches’.

      Obviously, women who employ this strategy will be unlikely to marry at all. To the extent their numbers swell and the spinster class grows, they will continue to provide a cautionary tale.

      You don’t get a bottoming out of both fertility and marriage rates to the lowest levels seen in 80 years by saying ‘Yes’, or being exactly open to too many possibilities beyond self gratification or self involvement.

      True enough, but this is hardly a strictly female problem. Our culture of narcissism, consumerism and entitlement sweeps up the men as well.

  • “I don’t understand this comment. How does this post shame men?”

    Susan, my comment was addressed to Rebound Girl’s ‘put on your big boy pants’ & ‘Some people are just afraid of being alone I guess’ comments, but according to OTC, Rebound Girlfriend is Plain Jane, so I guess it was for nothing anyway. I must be out of practice with the troll- spotting.

    However, even I can see ‘Unending Improv’ fits the PJ Pyjamas.

  • Deli

    //Readers of Susan’s list should also consider built-in redundancy. When anti-idiosyncratic models of human behaviour are used as the basis for advice to nameless, countless others, widespread failure in practice is guaranteed (for much the same reason anti-biotics and predictive stock market algorithms tend to fail). Not immediately, but inevitably. There are no normal people in practice. No, not even Susan.

    In the words of Tim Minchin in his “If I didn’t have you (I would have somebody else)” song:

    “I am just saying
    I don’t think you’re special.
    I mean, of course you are special,
    But you fall within the bell curve.”

    Sure, the cookie-cutter advice based on a train-of-thought analysis of a singular researcher (Susan) is doomed to be rough. It’s simply poor science (Not saying that you can find any good science on the web on this topic. Good science would be a fully funded research institute with double blind testing and etc.)
    But I take poor science over good faith any time of the day.

    People should accept, that they may be the outliers, that they may be on the tails of the bell curve. And thus some theory will not work for them. Or that some “science” given to them regarding their relationships will be poor science, flawed by design.
    But the only thing it should spur, is the willingness to contribute and to report, pushing to crunch this problem through massive statistical analysis.

    The fact that antibiotics become ineffective when applying them to the same bacteria over time does not in ANY WAY undermine the indisputable value of antibiotics being developed in the first place.

    Human behavior and human interaction is more complex than finding a way to kill a bacteria and it’s a much more of a self-adjusting system than any field of study we faced before,
    but it is not sacred,
    it is not unknowable,
    it is simply another problem under humanity’s microscope.

    And anyone willing to make an educated stab at this problem has my gratitude and support.

  • Suzan.

    Great post.

    But is something else going on ?

    There must be :

    “I had given up all hope and was not even looking when I saw her profile on Myspace,” writes Mario Passi of Newton. “Too shy to send an actual message, I simply sent her a friend request. She replies with: ‘Hello, Mario. I accept your friend request. 🙂 So I was checking out your personal profile, which led me to your music profile, and can I just say? I love the rocker pants!’ And the rest is history!”

    And there seems to be humor too :

    “Back in 2005, I was doing the online dating thing. But this is no average online dating story,” writes Karen Schwartz Alpert. “One morning, I received an email from a guy named Dan in Chicago. Chicago? Apparently, he thought I was the perfect match for his friend Greg in Boston. I can’t remember whether I was feeling really optimistic or really desperate that morning, but I agreed to email Greg. We exchanged a few emails, met and really hit it off. Well, I thought it was amazing that his friend was able to pick me out of thousands of women. Ends up it wasn’t that amazing. Dan had actually emailed over 20 women for Greg on the dating site! Hilarious. To all of the women out there who didn’t respond to Dan and take a chance on Greg, thank you. He is the love of my life… my husband… and soon-to-be the father of my first child.”

    And where is the How To’s in this :

    Molly Hughes of Somerville wasn’t used to dating nice guys and had to do some work to get Rob Caravella’s attention. At what she deemed the “most romantic place in Boston,” Faneuil Hall’s Hong Kong restaurant, she took authority: grabbing his rear and ordering him to dance. After a shaky first month, in which she played hard to get, they went on a real date and have now been dating for a year and a half.

    And then one should just thank heaven :

    A series of events pulled Kathryn from Greece, through Jamaica Plain, and eventually into Brian’s arms. From hearing a voice telling her to leave Greece and “go find Brian,” she was also led to a new career at Angell-Memorial, where Brian worked, by a lost kitten. They have now been married over three years and together over six. “Moral of the story?” Kathryn Camgemi says, “If you’re open to the idea of angelic guidance, they will gladly help. Thanks to a nudge from above and a mysterious black kitty, I found my true love.”

    And then one must have confidence :

    Rob must be one smooth guy. To be in politics, you have to be, right? While campaigning for campus-wide office at UMass-Amherst, he asked a girl out for dinner. At dinner, he got another vote. “At the end of the meal, I left my novelty business card (‘Rob Moore: Good Guy to Know’) with the check for our waitress. Apparently, I did something to impress the waitress; she emailed me the next day,” said Rob, of Duxbury. “Things never went anywhere with the girl with whom I was on the date, but five years later, I married the waitress!”

    And sometimes one can be creep :

    Jenn and Chris glanced at each other for the first time in a Barnes and Noble café line. Chris proceeded to spend the next three hours following Jenn through the store, but not saying a word. After feeling disappointed that he didn’t try to engage in conversation, Jenn went home for the night. After recapping the evening to her friend, Jen’s friend suggested that she go back the same day the following week to see if the same guy was there. Jenn did, and Chris was there. When he finally mustered up the confidence to talk to Jenn, he admitted that he returned to the bookstore every night after their initial encounter, hoping that Jenn would be there.

    Five months later, the couple were married and are now awaiting the birth of their second child.

    Ultimately Suzan, it does seem that for everybody a Bashert exists.

    It’s just that sometimes you can only see her, and never meet her.

    You speak with confusion, no matter what you say now really has no solid meaning. Like I said you are letting the laws of the past, override the morals of your future. There are going to be alot of emotions you are going to keep swaying back and forth from. Your emotions that sway side to side above your heart and under your head. Though at times your emotions can feel as a pendulum finding a closer attachment to the burdens of your heart. For you being emotionally happy will be the balance in your life to live in happiness. You will find all the right words to say, when you find yourself. Could you define what desires you have of the heart, and that of the mind without confusing the two to be related to emotions? Do you know the difference between an emotion and an experience? People tend to journey out into the world looking for themselves endlessly, when all they needed to do was define who they are. We can talk emotions and feelings once you have control over them, but for now dont get caught up speaking in something that controls you.

    … and how I wish I could meet this girl.

    Oh well.

    • @Marellus

      Ha, I’m glad you enjoyed those stories from my hometown newspaper! Let’s hear it for Random Encounters. The fourth most common way people meet their spouses. I note that there are some serious beta moves in there. Not a cocky move in the whole bunch.

      Megaman described it pretty accurately, I think. Many couples meet, start dating, and it works. There’s no handwringing about the DTR, what does it mean, am I willing to be monogamous, etc. There’s a lot of overthinking that goes on, but the winners are the ones who never even contemplate trying to grab the upper hand.

  • Mike C #64, yes that is accurate to an extent, but I’d say for a relationship-oriented woman, all men basically start out on the not-relationship ladder, and she is wary of the man who tries to jump too early to the relationship ladder before she has gained sufficient information to place him there herself. Sassy mentioned something similar in #22.

  • J #62, yes that’s it exactly. Love takes getting to know a person very well, and encompasses an intellectual, spiritual and emotional connection. It’s not as simple as (insert date number here).

    Ted D #23, sorry but that’s not “boyfriend+girlfriend,” nor a relationship. That’s merely saying “I’m going to focus all my attention on you while we get to know each other better,” i.e. not dating around. My husband and I did that on the first week of talking. Not the same as real “commitment” at all. That takes love.

  • Abbot

    “promiscuous behaviour in women is a huge red flag & turn-off to men relationship-wise”

    A much larger red flag to men than the red flag women see when a man comes on too fast romantically

  • Ted D

    Hope – “sorry but that’s not “boyfriend+girlfriend,” nor a relationship. ”

    LOL well I pretty much call anyone I’m dating and not engaged/married to a “girlfriend”, so maybe we are arguing semantics.

    My only complaint here is people assuming that a request for exclusivity somehow equals an expression of love and devotion. To me they do not, and a guy asking to “get exclusive” at date 3 or 4 to me is NOT somehow emoting unending love and devotion, unless he specifically says “I love you and am devoted to you forever!” or something similar.

    But as OTC pointed out, I’m “old school” where spinning plates is an immoral concept, at least if those spinning plates include anything physical…

  • Tomato

    My reasons for being wary of men who were too eager were 1) they barely knew me and yet they proclaimed a deep emotional connection and 2) since they did 1) with me, it’s likely they did it with others. The men wanted a relationship instead of wanting a relationship WITH ME, an important distinction.

    • @Tomato

      The men wanted a relationship instead of wanting a relationship WITH ME, an important distinction.

      This comes up again and again. No one wants to be a commodity, the player of some part. I would advise men to be wary of women who do this as well – I’ve seen women go through a series of boyfriends culled from their “guy friend” group. It’s a way to get one’s heart broken.

  • Erik L

    So these men are commitment sluts? Maybe society needs some commitment slut shaming. The whole thing rings true for me. I think a lot of the objections are for the standard reason: Things would be so much simpler if people didn’t behave this way so why do they? The answer is, they just do, so you can either deal with people as you wish they were, and likely fail, or deal with them the way they are and, well, still probably fail but perhaps less often.

  • chris

    “HanSolo doesn’t like it that women do not appreciate eager, unconditional affection from the start, and he doesn’t quite understand why this should be so, but he does accept it:

    I have developed a more catlike nature. The dog in me is always longing to get out with the right woman though and cover her with affection.

    I have so much love waiting for the right woman.

    I feel like I have built a dam to hold it back but the rains keep falling and the reservoir is always brimming to the top.

    I want to find the woman who wants my love. That thirsts for it. Whose heart is a desert. Who will open the spillways and let me love her fully. Who will love me back. Completely, fully, with abandon.

    Until then, I fuck the occasional pussy and wait.

    Women fantasize about finding that kind of love with a man, as the Romance Literature industry attests. However, it should be noted that in female fantasy, this level of commitment and devotion from a man is hard won, not a thing to be given away lightly. Women understand this instinctively – we can be extremely interested in a guy, pinching ourselves over our good fortune in attracting this gorgeous man, only to find him unappealing and yes, creepy, within a date or two. His eagerness to be immediately and deeply in love sounds alarm bells. ”

    http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2012/08/24/comment-of-the-week-precision-analogies-edition/

    Also with respect to Number 7 We worry about buyer’s remorse.

    http://www.bakadesuyo.com/2012/07/what-you-should-look-for-in-a-marriage-partne-31938/

    “This study examined the long-term consequences of idealization in marriage, using both daily diary and questionnaire data collected from a sample of 168 newlywed couples who participated in a 4-wave, 13-year longitudinal study of marriage. Idealization was operationalized as the tendency for people to perceive their partner as more agreeable than would be expected based on their reports of their partner’s agreeable and disagreeable behaviors. Spouses who idealized one another were more in love with each other as newlyweds. Longitudinal analyses suggested that spouses were less likely to suffer declines in love when they idealized one another as newlyweds. Newlywed levels of idealization did not predict divorce.”

    • @Chris

      Are you the chris who left that comment at Heartiste? It’s so good I’m going to include it here in full:

      “Perhaps one way to conceptualise why women don’t like emotional/sensitive guys would be to consider this.

      Men value women for their sexual intimacy, while women value men for the emotional intimacy.

      Now men don’t want a relationship with a woman who is promiscuous with her sexual intimacy as it either indicates she has low value, or potential for cuckoldry.

      Perhaps women don’t want relationships with emotional/sensitive guys as these men are promiscuous with their emotional intimacy. And their emotional promiscuity indicates they are either low value or have a potential for abandonment.

      So a niceguy is to women, what a slut is to a man.

      Now, when you here feminist therapists telling men they they should be more sensitive and get in touch with their feminine side and what not, those therapists are no different from some old sleazy lecher trying to convince women that it’s in their best interest to sleep around and experiment with their sexuality in the hopes that the woman will sleep with them.

      Basically, telling men to be more sensitive is a ploy to make it easier for women to use men, just as telling women to be more sexually open would be a ploy to make it easier for men to use women.”

  • Ted D

    “This comes up again and again. No one wants to be a commodity, the player of some part. ”

    And yet here we talk about sex for commitment “deals” like we are negotiating a contract. We see men AND women told to behave in certain ways to be a ‘better product’, and all this while Jezebel and the ‘sphere keep telling men and woman how to act to “be more attractive” instead of how to be themselves and proud of it.

    Sorry to say it, but I personally don’t feel like there is much to “love and romance” in modern society that isn’t somehow consumerist and based on commodity. Sex is a commodity. Commitment is a commodity. And it seems that most people are more interested in getting a better deal than an ideal husband/wife.

  • chris
    • @Chris

      Also, great links on idealization in marriage. I found this interesting:

      “The protective effects of unrealistic idealization emerged despite the fact that individuals who were initially the happiest generally had further to fall. That is, people who were more satisfied initially experienced steeper declines in satisfaction. Also, further analyses revealed that people who initially idealized their partner more also experienced steeper declines in the perception that their partner met their ideals. Despite these evident risks of disappointment, initial idealization predicted sustained satisfaction over the course of marriage.”

      The question is, how can we sustain that idealization?

  • Abbot

    “No one wants to be a commodity, the player of some part.”

    No man wants his chosen woman to have been a commodity, someone who willfully fell onto players

  • Re: cad behavior to mimic “sweep her off her feet” theatrics. I can attest to a less deceptive version of this. Fisherian Explorers (and sociopaths, unfortunately) may have intense “orienting reflex” behaviors that heavily concentrate attentional resources on the new person or object.

    I’ll feel a strong rush to learn more about an attractive or interesting person and will usually eventually attempt some kind of social maneuvering so that I can isolate her for more detailed, 1 on 1 questioning. I find myself really wanting to know how this person thinks, her goals and preference sets, etc. and to increasingly see other people at the event as distractions or clutter in a radar field. This isn’t contrived—I’d describe it as a triggered, hunting type behavior that combines lust and curiosity and artistic interest. The interpersonal style and techniques involved may be fairly elegant, but the underlying emotions do feel primal.

    I never try to gain DTR exclusivity or profess emotional commitment this early, but if there is a potentially deeper connection—physical, intellectual, whatever—I may well escalate rapidly with a date suggestion that would appear to be more grandiose than warranted by the brief time that we have known each other. The high probability of sex being involved is usually implicit in my recommendation. Sometimes I may have to make a disclaimer about how the offered weekend on a boat or whatever would be “just Platonic, of course”, but it’s quite absurd and I feel like I’m just checking some mandatory box.

    Negative part: the highly focused interest does tend to burn out very quickly if left to its own devices.

    • @BB

      I may well escalate rapidly with a date suggestion that would appear to be more grandiose than warranted by the brief time that we have known each other.

      If anyone can get away with this, it’s the male with sky high SMV.

  • Abbot

    “a niceguy is to women, what a slut is to a man”

    Is that what Marcotte was getting at here?:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/09/30/hookinguprealities/marcottes-boxers-are-in-a-twist-over-nice-guys/

    .

  • Ted D

    Susan – From quoted text: “Perhaps women don’t want relationships with emotional/sensitive guys as these men are promiscuous with their emotional intimacy. And their emotional promiscuity indicates they are either low value or have a potential for abandonment.”

    OK but there is a snag here. For a guy like me who is highly introverted, I don’t tend to be ‘promiscuous’ with my emotional intimacy. I simply don’t bother being super selective when it comes to women, because I’m super selective when it comes to people in general. So, any woman that makes it past our first meeting has already been filtered, and to me there is very little need to filter much more past date 3ish.

    I’m by no means emotionally promiscuous, but only because I’m not very social at all. This is why I say that the few relationships I have (romantic or friendships) tend to be rather emotionally charged, and my dealings with “people” are very cold and business like.

    I don’t filter hard for mates, I filter hard for everybody/anybody I intend to connect with at all. And for the most part, once a person gets past those initial filters, I’ve already decided to “open myself up” to them in whatever manner is appropriate for the relationship I intend to foster. (friendship, romance, etc.)

    • @Ted

      I imagine that if a woman knows you at all, she knows you filter aggressively up front, which means you have high standards. I also seriously doubt whether you come across as emo and supplicating even as you offer exclusivity early on. You appear to work from a very strong frame, which must make a difference.

  • Ted D

    BB – “Fisherian Explorers (and sociopaths, unfortunately) may have intense “orienting reflex” behaviors that heavily concentrate attentional resources on the new person or object.”

    I went on a Google hunt based on this comment, and just found Helen Fisher’s test for personality type. (not sure how I missed it as I am sure it has been mentioned here before…)

    It seems I am a Director/Builder – and I’d say the descriptions of these match my personality better than the MBTI did. Fascinating stuff that I’ll need to read up on…

  • Ted D

    Susan – “You appear to work from a very strong frame, which must make a difference.”

    Thanks, but I’m not trying to focus on myself here. I’m just pointing out that I know several guys pretty much just like myself. Before I even consider asking a woman out, I’d spend at least an hour or so watching her interact with others. Unless I’m introduced directly, I spend more time watching new people than talking to the the first time we meet. By the time we talk, I’ve already got a good idea of what kind of person they are, what type of temperament they have, and how they interact with others. (touchy, distant, humorous, stuffy, etc.)

    That being said, every one of my LTR mates were introduced to me by mutual friends/family. And in each case, I knew of them a bit before we officially met. So, by the time we were introduced, I’d already decided they were decent people.

    So my point is, not everyone waits until AFTER date 1 to start filtering. I’ve done at least half of mine before I even say hello.

  • Iggles

    Women do not want to be robbed of this opportunity to compete with other females. If there are no other females competing for him, a guy benefits from holding to his high standards in any case.

    Again, Susan I have to disagree here!

    That’s an extrovert thing! Introverted women do not like “competing” with other friends. For us, the guy we like entertaining direct challenger does NOT generate attraction! It’s likely to cause us to lost interest and move on — much like introverted men hate when women play “hard to get”.

    Since we do NOT like games, we do NOT feel “robbed” if a man is consistent and direct regarding his interest. As long as he escalates at a reasonable pace we will do so in kind. Directness, in fact, will increase our opinion of him; not diminish it!

    Having low standards, or worse, none (like our friend in the comic above), is a turnoff to women.

    This is true.

    Introverted girls don’t like men who are “emotional sluts” either. Sluttiness – whether physical or emotional – implies a lack of discernment. All that’s needed is a warm body! The individual is replaceable.

    • @Iggles

      Since we do NOT like games, we do NOT feel “robbed” if a man is consistent and direct regarding his interest. As long as he escalates at a reasonable pace we will do so in kind. Directness, in fact, will increase our opinion of him; not diminish it!

      OK! I stand corrected! As a rather extreme extrovert, I appreciate the viewpoint of introverts as needed.

      I can understand well how refreshing direct and forthright communication is in relationship, as long as the commitment is offered at a point where one has truly had the opportunity to get to know the other person.

  • Abbot

    “Sluttiness – whether physical or emotional – implies a lack of discernment. All that’s needed is a warm body!”

    True. But the physical type still gets the perp something

  • chris

    “@Chris

    Are you the chris who left that comment at Heartiste?”

    Yes.

    “The question is, how can we sustain that idealization?”

    In the discussion of the study that that link referred to the authors note

    “Idealizing a partner might have protective effects because
    people have the power to shape their romantic fates through their
    behavior. Indeed, the behaviors that sustain relationships (e.g.,
    being supportive) and the behaviors that undermine relationships
    (e.g., being critical) are controllable ones. Therefore, believing
    that a partner reflects one’s hopes might predict continued satisfaction because it fosters the optimism that is needed to behave
    well and cope admirably with the costs and challenges that come
    with interdependence (Murray & Holmes, 2011). The power that
    idealization might have in fostering such resilience likely rests in
    the flexibility of the construal process itself (Griffin & Ross,
    1991). Over time, people in dating relationships redefine their
    ideals to match the qualities they perceive in their partners
    (Fletcher et al., 2000; Murray et al., 1996b). The same processes
    may be reflected in the results reported here. As time and greater
    interdependence reveal exactly how a partner is disappointing,
    people who flexibly adjust their ideals to match the qualities they
    now perceive in their partner might stay satisfied despite the
    disappointments (Kunda, 1990).”

    Thus, if you want to sustain the idealisation, ensure your partner lives up to those ideals, change your ideals, or don’t become aware of your partners ability to live up to those ideals, i.e. if you think you wife is ohh so sweet and perfect, don’t routinely watch her crap on the toilet.

    Another thing one may note in the discussion of the study is this;

    “Remarkably, participants who initially exhibited high
    unrealistic idealization of their partner experienced no decline
    in marital satisfaction. In contrast, those who initially idealized their partner the least experienced precipitous declines in
    satisfaction. Moreover, partners’ unrealistic idealization of
    actors predicted the same benefits for actors’ satisfaction.”

    So perhaps the more deluded one is about their partner te better it is for a marriage?

  • Abbot

    “the more deluded one is about their partner the better it is for a marriage”

    More than ever before. The duper slut is on the prowl.

  • Tomato

    “This comes up again and again. No one wants to be a commodity, the player of some part. I would advise men to be wary of women who do this as well – I’ve seen women go through a series of boyfriends culled from their “guy friend” group. It’s a way to get one’s heart broken.”

    Absolutely! Being cautious of those that give their heart without knowing the other person is good advice for both men and women. I’m also wary of those that jump from relationship to relationship to intentionally avoid “down time”, as they may be doing this because they are uncomfortable with themselves and want to avoid any self-reflection that can come from being alone.

  • Ted D, if your semantics are not what most others understand, yeah there will be confusion. Being in a relationship without love is pointless to me, like having a pizza without toppings. But since you said you fall in love easily, I guess it’s no big deal to you.

    I have also never experienced a guy asking me for exclusivity before getting to know me well. Maybe I’m just not that hot, or maybe I already gave off the vibe that I don’t “shop around.” When I fell in love it was always before any traditional physical date.

    Bastiat Blogger #87, my husband has some of that single-minded focus, drive and high intensity. He is very impatient. When he wants something, he wants it passionately and *now*. It was definitely a whirlwind experience to be the subject of that passion, and I was a little sad when he no longer gave me that much attention.

    On the other hand, he also has high comfort traits and hates the nervous/uncertaint part of the romantic “chase.” So he isn’t looking for some other woman to satisfy that high. Nowadays he tends to get excited about new toys and gadgets.

  • Iggles #96, I definitely agree with everything you said. Honesty and directness are appreciated in my book.

    As an aside, it’s almost eerie how similar our experiences have been, and that we’re both INFJ and see eye-to-eye on all these things!

  • WomenAreGutlessCowards

    Did you delete my posts, Susan? WTF? So now nobody knows what you are referring to, and of course, can’t make up their minds for themselves.

    Gee… I didn’t realise this site was intended for kindergarten, for children who can’t READ something without having a heart attack about it.

    Did you rebut anything I said? I must have missed that.

    • Did you delete my posts, Susan? WTF?

      Your handle alone is grounds enough to spam you. Come back when you’ve had a major attitude adjustment and can speak to all here with respect.

  • chris

    Just realised then I should have put;

    “or don’t become aware of your partners INability to live up to those ideals”

  • Iggles

    Thanks Hope.

    Actually I’m an INFP, “The idealist”.
    (Pragmatic optimist are the two words that sums up my outlook on life..)

  • Ted D

    Hope – “Maybe I’m just not that hot, or maybe I already gave off the vibe that I don’t “shop around.” ”

    I highly doubt it is a lack of hotness, and most likely the fact that you do indeed give off a “vibe” that leads guys to believe you are rather exclusive by default. Truth is, if you are as shy as you claim to be, any guy watching you interact with others (and pays any attention at all) would know before he introduces himself that you are likely a “one man kinda woman” and not worry so much about exclusivity.*

    I never had the DTR talk with my first two LTR mates, because they were both rather shy and clearly had limited dating experience. I didn’t worry about them ‘dating around’ because they didn’t make a habit of it before, so I didn’t expect them to start after we met.

    Now my ex and current wife? Yeah, I had the “exclusivity” discussion pretty early on, although with the current wife we, like you and your husband, didn’t start out with “dating” at all. We met through friends, got to know each other, and after a couple months found ourselves standing on her front porch kissing. She actually said to me at the time she wasn’t looking for a boyfriend, to which I replied “fine, I won’t be your boyfriend!”

    Far as it goes I still got what I wanted, and ultimately so did she it seems. 😉

    *note: If you really want to get a girls hamster spinning, and you can learn to “figure people out” by simply watching them, NOTHING gets the female gears turning better than being able to tell her about herself on your first meeting. Of course you gotta keep it vague (because you can only make guesses at much of it) but all it takes is enough “right” answers to flip her switch. Kinda like how some people go nuts over Astrology. Of course, be careful about delivery or the “creep” word might get thrown out. and as always YMMV

  • Joe

    Sorry. I’m way behind. @Mike C.

    Internalize that you the guy are THE PRIZE. Make the girl chase you.

    Not sure about that. It contradicts about 2 million years of evolution.
    He chased her until she caught him. is a much more accurate description of the cat and mouse game Susan describes in the post.

    The misconceptions raging around here make me feel like the oldtimer that I am. If anyone thinks that women bare the risks of sexual commitment, then they need to realize that men bare the risks of emotional commitment. No one is getting away scott free.

    Having said that, if you’re standing pat, holding your ground so you won’t get taken by anyone in this game, get over yourself. Those who DON’T take the risks are the biggest losers, you know. They’re the biggest fools too.

    • @Joe

      Having said that, if you’re standing pat, holding your ground so you won’t get taken by anyone in this game, get over yourself. Those who DON’T take the risks are the biggest losers, you know. They’re the biggest fools too.

      +1

      I’ve heard some recent references to “vulnerability Game.” How tragic is that? Fools who refuse to take risks pretending that they’re willing to take risks, all to get laid, without an ounce of feeling outside one’s cock.

  • Cooper

    “Directness, in fact, will increase our opinion of him; not diminish it!”

    Well, I shall target introverts, then.

    @Susan
    “”@J
    It was our first date; I was pretty sure that I was going to marry him before the night was over.”
    I love this. I hear this a lot, actually. When it’s the future husband, women KNOW.” -Beautiful Women must try harder #1416

    If women can KNOW, then what’s the need for 7 reasons? When you have one that will suffice – “I don’t see you as my future husband.”

    If there’s 3 types of girls I can encounter: ones that immediately know, ones that immediate know NOT, and ones that don’t know yet.
    The ones that don’t know yet stand as the greatest risk to my investment, and opportunity costs.
    Why wouldn’t I next anyone that doesn’t know, and keep looking one that does? (Clearly, even you believe, they exist)

    If there are women who can come to the conclusion of wanting a guy from a husband quicker than others, assuming all being equal, why would any guy focus on the undecided ones?

    • @Cooper

      If there are women who can come to the conclusion of wanting a guy from a husband quicker than others, assuming all being equal, why would any guy focus on the undecided ones?

      That’s a good strategic question!

      In J’s case, she had known her husband for six months by the time they went on a date. I was already in love with my husband by the time he deigned to kiss me.

      In general, though, you’d have to see whether the “quick deciders” were materially different in their MMV from those who took more time, and whether they possess traits that are compatible with yours. My guess is that impulsive attracts impulsive, and thoughtful attracts thoughtful.

  • Ted D

    Cooper – “If there are women who can come to the conclusion of wanting a guy from a husband quicker than others, assuming all being equal, why would any guy focus on the undecided ones?”

    LOL brother that’s easy! Because the women that “just know” and the women that can’t decide are the exact same women with a different guy. When she is with an equal/lower SMV guy, she can’t decide. But, if she manages to snag a higher SMV guy, all of a sudden she just “knows”. 😛

    OK cynicism aside, some people really do just click for lack of a better term.

  • Cooper

    ” the women that can’t decide are the exact same women with a different guy”

    It sounds like a joke, but it’s how I feel. If she isn’t undecided with me, she’s very well head-over-heels (immediately) for someone else.

    And I’m better off looking for someone who wishes to be head-over-heels for me (cause of her perceiving a SMV-difference) than to waste my effort, time, and opportunities with one who obviously doesn’t have the wits to know her simply ‘isn’t that into me’ from the get-go.

  • Cooper

    *If she **IS** undecided with me

  • Tomato

    Anecdote I know, but I was definitely not a “just know” woman with my husband when I met him. I had just ended a long term relationship and needed some down time for closure but my eventual-husband persisted until he won me over. I didn’t see him as “eager”, just confident, although everyone will categorize the two differently, and behavior viewed as eager when displayed by one person can often be viewed as confident when displayed by another! Such is the confusing mush of human relationships.

    • @Tomato

      behavior viewed as eager when displayed by one person can often be viewed as confident when displayed by another! Such is the confusing mush of human relationships.

      This is a good point! I think the man’s frame makes an enormous difference here. I recall one young woman who told me that she was on a date with a guy and the subject of tattoos came up. He asked her if she had any and she said, yes a tiny star. He asked where it was and she said on her hip, not visible. He said, “I’m going to see that star and see it regularly. That is going to be my star.” She tingled so hard she nearly fell off her chair. As it happens, he eventually turned her off with his cockiness, but that’s another story. If he’d calibrated better, she would have gone all in.

  • Ted D

    Tomato – “Such is the confusing mush of human relationships.”

    My sentiments exactly. 😉 Human social interactions often confuse me, and it gets worse as I dig deeper. LOL

  • Cooper

    I get that women don’t like decided men. I get it.

    It robs you of the uncertainty. And getting to “win” him.

    But surely I can’t be speaking gibberish when I say that uncertainty is going to far more present with guys approaching you with less than long-term intension – ones that don’t necessarily place you on the GF-ladder – than the other way around.
    It borders on the sentiment that unattainable is more worth it, which I think tends people towards uninterest individuals more so than worth-while ones.

  • Cooper

    “andd it gets worse as I dig deeper. LOL”

    LOL.

  • Ted D

    Cooper – “It borders on the sentiment that unattainable is more worth it, which I think tends people towards uninterest individuals more so than worth-while ones.”

    DING DING DING! That is the irony I keep seeing over and over when this discussion comes up. The guys women claim to want for long term relationships are the guys they are the most “turned off” by. I get that men can learn “inner game” to fix this, and for their own benefit they should, but what exactly does it say about the modern woman in general that they say one thing, do another, and then get upset that their tactics didn’t work?

    Insanity – doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

  • Cooper, that’s not as simple as “date 1 – I want him as my husband.” On the one hand you could say I “knew” right away with my husband, but that was only when he revealed his inner self to me, several weeks after we had known each other in the same social circle. After the first 5 hours of intense conversation with him, yeah I knew there was definitely potential, but not before then.

    The first thing my husband had ever said to me actually turned me off and made me dismiss him as some typical dudebro player type. He had negged me pretty hard over ventrilo. When I started talking to him more, and he told me about that initial joking neg/tease, I was like, “That was YOU?!” To be fair, he only said it because I was jokingly being a “typical girl,” and only after talking to me more did he realize there was more to me.

    Also, my falling head-over-heels in love was NOT because of some perceived SMV difference. It was because I saw that he was full of wisdom, spirituality and love, and we just connected so well that it was like we had known each other for years already. It sounds cliche, but we had “a lot in common.” Objective SMV-wise he was not some celebrity, but he was far above any celebrity to me, if that makes sense.

  • Cooper

    @Ted D

    I don’t think the women realize how this contradiction impacts nice guys.

    Every time I feel butterflies I tell myself to stomp on them. Every time I feel light beaming from my heart, I remind myself to wrap black, light-tight, tape around that sucker.
    Have those things are far more often a turn off than a turn on. (Albiet perhaps with extroverted girls than introverted ones)

    This post just reminds me that I can’t move things forward – she has to. And when dealing with introverted girl, I think this is a receipe for disaster. Introverts don’t like PLI games. And women placing such an importance on having “win his heart” just enphasizes the important of PLI-tactics, and how important it is for, however, emotional guys to cut that shit out. A shame IMO.

  • Cooper

    “Enphasizes”

    Where were you on that one, autocorrect!

  • Ted D

    Cooper – “Every time I feel butterflies I tell myself to stomp on them. Every time I feel light beaming from my heart, I remind myself to wrap black, light-tight, tape around that sucker.”

    I understand completely. But, don’t kill that off entirely! You’ll want those ‘feelings’ later for fuel to run the relationship.

    “This post just reminds me that I can’t move things forward – she has to.”

    I’m not so sure this is correct. YOU will have to “move things along”, but you’ll have to gauge how fast by her response to your initiative. I won’t say its easy (in fact I’d say that at least for me it is a real pain in the ass.) You simply have to move things along without coming from a place of “touchy/feely” emotions until she is ready for them.

    “And when dealing with introverted girl, I think this is a receipe for disaster. ”

    The only introverted woman I’ve been in a LTR with was actually pretty easy to please in this department. She wasn’t turned off by early commitment, shows of emotion, or my clingy periods. (I go through “moods” where I just feel the need to be clingy. I’m working on figuring out why and how to deal, but I’ve noticed they come FAR less post Red Pill…) Had we met a few years later in life instead of in HS, it might have worked out well. *shrug*

    • I’m not so sure this is correct. YOU will have to “move things along”, but you’ll have to gauge how fast by her response to your initiative.

      Yes, this is where it is important to stay within one step of your partner. I advise women the same way when discussing emotional escalation. You escalate, then you gauge his response. If it was not positive, you do not escalate further. You sit tight. Whether we like it or not, there is some element of “dance” in mating. Pace is important, and that must come from accurately reading the other person.

  • Russ in Texas

    Hope’s not unique: I know several wildly-successful marriages that started off on fast proposals very soon after the first date (mine is one of them, but nowhere near unique in that regard). How, then, to square that circle?

    Imho, There is a tremendous difference between sensing that it’s right to commit fast and early, and turning into a relentless puppy-dog. Even the most solipsistic and emotionally-blinkered woman can tell that difference, as it’s related to fundamental character and presentation.

    If MikeC is right, then Meyers-Briggs NFs may have an advantage there in this respect; that is real food for thought. Though the plural of anecdote is not data, every successful example of this kind of marriage I’ve known, has been “mutual recognition NF flavor.”

  • Iggles,

    Women do not want to be robbed of this opportunity to compete with other females. If there are no other females competing for him, a guy benefits from holding to his high standards in any case.

    Again, Susan I have to disagree here!

    That’s an extrovert thing! Introverted women do not like “competing” with other friends. For us, the guy we like entertaining direct challenger does NOT generate attraction!

    It’s interesting that you attribute this to an introvert-extrovert difference! I’m a slight extrovert and I HATE competing with other women for men. I like the fact that there aren’t really any other women lining up to get with my BF in case we break up or something (which is what I dealt with after my high school relationship ended, and I was beside myself with fury and shame).

    The competing thing has always been an issue for me though. You can ask any regular from a year ago, I’m constantly getting my panties in a bunch about female intrasexual competition and wishing there was a way to overcome it. It’s interesting that Susan often just sees it as a fact of life. I wonder how much of that is the wisdom of age, and how much is personalized experience.

  • Ted D

    Russ in Texas – “If MikeC is right, then Meyers-Briggs NFs may have an advantage there in this respect; that is real food for thought. ”

    Being married to an NF, I have to say that on first blush I think you are correct. We went from friendly acquaintances to moving in together within 5 months. (this includes the time we were simply friends)

    I’ll add that her abilities regarding social skills and understanding “people” by and large makes me appear even more inadequate at social skills than I actually am. Like Susan, my wife is a supreme diplomat. I admire it a great deal, but she had to learn NOT to use that stuff on me. Generally people attempting to be “diplomatic” with me just sets my panties in a bunch. Just slightly less than someone trying to “convince” me by using emotional ploys. Needless to say, I do NOT associate with people in sales much!

  • Ted D

    Olive – “The competing thing has always been an issue for me though.”

    I find this interesting, because I share your sentiments regarding competition in general, and certainly when it comes to dating. I’m wondering what traits we share in common.

    Mind you, it isn’t my lack of faith in my abilities that makes me dislike competition, it is that I really hate having to somehow “prove my worth” by competing directly. I much prefer individual evaluations when possible. I’m more than happy to have someone pick my work apart to find out where I need improvement, but do NOT use someone else as an example of what I should or shouldn’t be doing. I have no desire to be “better” than the next guy, I only want to do my best on my terms. I’m selfish like that!

  • Tomato

    I’m also not a competitor. If a guy says “I want to spend the rest of my life with you” after date #2, I’m not thinking “Oh damn, there goes my chance to fight off other women with an axe for his love!” I’m thinking “Really, dude? You hardly even know me.”

  • “Unattainable is more worth it”

    Maybe for someone who doesn’t actually want a loving relationship.

    There was a guy before my husband. I felt butterflies and the guy didn’t; I wanted to move things forward and he said no. He was the type to go for hard-to-get girls, and I was too eager. I was in the position of the “beta nice girl.”

    I actually asked my husband for advice, and he told me that I should just accept that it’s over and move on. After that conversation I opened my mind to the possibility of others. One of those possibilities was my husband. Two days later, I talked to my husband for two hours, and thus it began. 😛

    Ironically, a few years later, when that guy found out I was happily married and about to have a baby (i.e. unattainable), he was like “I should have accepted your offer back when you wanted me.” He was ready to get married and have kids then, but his girlfriend wasn’t. I shrugged, and cut off contact.

  • Russ in Texas, knowing we’re all ticking in similar ways doesn’t stop people from being interesting. In fact sometimes more so. 🙂

    Such impressive compexity and diversity comes from relatively few physical processes, which is itself a cause for awe.

  • LJ

    I don’t think anyone like “competition” in dating “The Bachelor/Bachelorette” style, but I think it’s important when you’re getting into a relationship w/ someone, to feel like you’re was actually selected over other options. So someone who is promiscuous, either physically or emotionally, isn’t selective, and so it really doesn’t feel like you’re anything special because they would have taken ANYONE.

    So if I’m dating a guy I don’t want competition in the sense that he tells me about the other girls he’s dating, but I want to get the sense that he knows that there are other women he could date but he’s choosing me because he actually likes me, not because he’s desperate to not be single anymore and I’m the only option.

    • So if I’m dating a guy I don’t want competition in the sense that he tells me about the other girls he’s dating, but I want to get the sense that he knows that there are other women he could date but he’s choosing me because he actually likes me, not because he’s desperate to not be single anymore and I’m the only option.

      Exactly.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Hope#127 — not sure I understood this part:

    “Russ in Texas, knowing we’re all ticking in similar ways doesn’t stop people from being interesting. In fact sometimes more so. ”

    Can you expand/clarify?

  • Ted D said ‘ “The guys women claim to want for long term relationships are the guys they are the most “turned off” by…what exactly does it say about the modern woman in general that they say one thing, do another, and then get upset that their tactics didn’t work?”

    I see this in women and men. We say we want one thing, but we behave in a way that leads us in the exact opposite direction. I don’t know if it’s a self-sabotage thing or just people not being able to admit what they want.

    Or maybe it has something to do with ye olde ambivalent attachment style (Can’t remember if attachment styles come up on this blog much) characterized by a lot of “Go-Away/Wait-Why-Are-You-Leaving-Me?” drama.

    These people want intimacy and feel threatened by it at the same time.

    I imagine it must be confusing to folks who are more the straight-shooter type.

  • Russ in Texas, basically what I mean is that when people fall in love, they tend to behave similarly and even have similar brain scans in studies. It’s quite fascinating.

    Also I like what you said about “mutually recognized NF flavor.” I know a couple who just recently got engaged who would probably fall under this as well.

  • Ted D

    “How tragic is that? Fools who refuse to take risks pretending that they’re willing to take risks, all to get laid, without an ounce of feeling outside one’s cock.”

    I don’t know if its tragic, but considering the current dating and mating environment, I find it to be totally predictable and expected. For many guys, the means always justifies the ends. And with sexual access so easily attained from a certain subset of women, the guys that like a ‘challenge’ will set their sites on women that don’t ‘give it up’ so easily. They aren’t just in it for the sex, they are looking for a real conquest, as in getting a restricted woman into bed on false pretenses.

    Not all PUA guys are cads of course. (I feel kinda stupid even typing that in, but I’m not trying to start a PUA grudgefest today.)

  • Doc

    All of this can be summed up simply as – a woman needs to compete with other women, and WIN a man. It is as simple as that – and any man who wants to have women, needs to already have women who want him. It’s a vicious cycle, since committing to one woman when you have many, really puts you at her mercy, since unless you have others showing your “proof of worth” you aren’t worth anything to her.

    This is why, it’s best to have a string of pearls – with each woman being brought along so you always have several. Any man that only has one woman to take care of his needs, is a fool, and will soon be a lonely fool…

  • Unending Improvement (@UnendImprov)

    @70 Byron:

    Far from it. In fact, take a look at my Twitter account. I can guarantee you I am probably the opposite of Plain Jane in every way.

  • Ted D

    Susan – ” I think the man’s frame makes an enormous difference here.”

    Question: Can you be more specific? I get the impression you are insinuating that individual women may view the same man completely different based simply on the presentation of their “frame?” Perhaps my idea of what frame consists of is flawed, but I thought it was simply a man’s general outlook on life and his place in it.

    • Can you be more specific? I get the impression you are insinuating that individual women may view the same man completely different based simply on the presentation of their “frame?” Perhaps my idea of what frame consists of is flawed, but I thought it was simply a man’s general outlook on life and his place in it.

      No, I agree with you. I think others have expressed this well already – a confident statement, e.g. “I like you. I want to see more of you.” is going to be a lot more favorably received than “You’re so amazing, I can’t believe this is happening. Can I see you tomorrow and text you 20 times between now and then?”

      This relates most directly to #s 1,3 and 4.

  • Ted,

    I find this interesting, because I share your sentiments regarding competition in general, and certainly when it comes to dating. I’m wondering what traits we share in common.

    Well for starters we live in the same area. 😛 I often get along with INTJs because everyone in my family is one (except me). I actually suspect my BF is either INTJ or INFJ.

    As for competition, I actually don’t mind it in other areas. I was once a very good pianist, and I’m sure you know certain areas of music performance (mainly classical) are all about the competition. I just hate the idea of competing with a good friend.

  • Ted D

    Olive – “As for competition, I actually don’t mind it in other areas. I was once a very good pianist, and I’m sure you know certain areas of music performance (mainly classical) are all about the competition. I just hate the idea of competing with a good friend.”

    I can enjoy competition in sports and games, but that’s about it. But I also don’t care too much about my abilities in sports or games, so I suppose that proves nothing. 😛

    I competed musically in HS, and although I thoroughly enjoyed placing and moving on, I never really enjoyed it, and certainly not from a “I’m better than all of them” standpoint. I guess I’m a bit self-centered in that each time I won, I simply believed I deserved it because my performance was the best. I never even considered that this also meant everyone else’s wasn’t, because other people rarely even enter my mind.

    That being said, I actually enjoy competing with friends, probably because unlike most “people”, I care about what my friends think. If I “win”, I assume they learn from my success. If I “lose”, I do my best to learn from theirs. I very much dislike competing with strangers on anything of importance, because I don’t feel like there is any value in losing to someone I can’t learn from. If I don’t know them, I don’t trust them. And if I don’t trust them, I won’t learn from them. (Holy crap that was complex!)

    I know you live in Da Burgh, but you aren’t from here originally, right?

  • Ted D

    “I competed musically in HS, and although I thoroughly enjoyed placing and moving on, I never really enjoyed it, and certainly not from a “I’m better than all of them” standpoint.”

    Let me clarify. (hard to write on phone screen!)

    I mean that although I enjoyed placing and moving on, I didn’t derive any pleasure from beating everyone else. I was simply happy *I* was moving on.

  • Ted D

    In fact, thinking back on it, I often felt bad for the people I beat! And on occasion even thought to myself that someone else deserved the win more than I did. Once I even said so to my choral instructor after the winners were posted, and he told me it wasn’t my decision to worry about. LOL (it wasn’t his either as we were at a district vocal competition. The kid I thought should have won in my place not only sang well, but he had perfect pitch! Totally amazing ability, but I guess it didn’t help his overall singing ability though…)

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I think others have expressed this well already – a confident statement, e.g. “I like you. I want to see more of you.” is going to be a lot more favorably received than “You’re so amazing, I can’t believe this is happening. Can I see you tomorrow and text you 20 times between now and then?””

    OK. But you realize that some of this may simply be bad communication style right? I mean, “you’re so amazing I can’t believe this is happening…” is way over the top, but:
    “I like you and want to see more of you”

    and

    “You are really amazing. Can we do something tomorrow”

    To me, both statements are pretty much saying the exact same thing. However, I bet many people here will say the “frame” in the second statement is weaker because the speaker “seems” to be deferential and submissive.

    I like you = you are amazing – to me, anyone I actually like is amazing so…

    I want to see more of you = can we do something tomorrow? – First example to me seems rather presumptuous and conceded, while the second seems polite and courteous. Of course I realize that most women would see it as supplication, because instead of stating they were going out, it was phrased as a question. However I don’t see much distinction here.

    • @Ted

      First example to me seems rather presumptuous and conceded, while the second seems polite and courteous. Of course I realize that most women would see it as supplication, because instead of stating they were going out, it was phrased as a question. However I don’t see much distinction here.

      You don’t see the distinction, but women do! I would not call the first presumptuous or conceited, I call it confident and dominant, though not unpleasantly so. The second is less supplicating in your revision, but is still too admiring and eager. Unless time is short, trying to schedule date #2 for the very next day is too much.

      For those readers who watched Girls last season, Charlie was the perfect example of this kind of male. Good looking, but so needy and supplicating it was sickitating. (During sex he cooed to his gf: “don’t abandon me, don’t abandon me.”)

  • Presentation is important (I work in the field of making things look good). When HanSolo posted about love, it was noted that the words sounded poetic. I imagine if instead he posted something like: “i hav soooo much luv in me!!! i cant wait to giv to sum hot grrl!!!” people would have found it to be an atrocity. 😛

    English is my second language, but I have worked hard at my linguistic skills so that at least in that regard, I have good “presentation.”

    I think wit, sociability and “frame” are for men what looks, charm and femininity are for women. Decrying those masculine presentation traits is like a woman whining that she has to look good. Well, you don’t have to, but it sure makes you more likely to find someone good.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I see this in women and men. We say we want one thing, but we behave in a way that leads us in the exact opposite direction. I don’t know if it’s a self-sabotage thing or just people not being able to admit what they want.”

    Humans have certain ideals that we live by and want someone who matches those, in addition to being hot or sexually attractive of course. But sometimes chemistry happens with people who don’t share all of our ideals and sometimes chemistry even happens with people who don’t even fit our physical type either. That bumper sticker – “shit happens”. There’s no controlling for it.

    “So if I’m dating a guy I don’t want competition in the sense that he tells me about the other girls he’s dating, but I want to get the sense that he knows that there are other women he could date but he’s choosing me because he actually likes me, not because he’s desperate to not be single anymore and I’m the only option.”

    I really didn’t care if there were other women he could date or not. I just didn’t like that he was lying to me in order to use me and my apartment as a launching pad into a better life. I’m sure his thinking was, “well I don’t really love her now but its possible I could love her once I move there and if not, at least I’ll be in a better place to find someone I really will love than where I am now.”

  • Ramble

    Fools who refuse to take risks pretending that they’re willing to take risks, all to get laid, without an ounce of feeling outside one’s cock.

    Who says they are fools. Guys and girls go about protecting themselves, while attempting to satisfy their desires, in different ways.

    Mike Tyson, who was a rather aggressive person, said throughout most of his adult like that, in general, he was scared. He has told some horrific stories as to how he was bullied when he was younger and that one factor that drove him to learn to fight was so that he could destroy his tormentors.

    In short, he learned to fight so that he could hurt people. How tragic is that?

    But, to this man, it makes sense.

    • @Ramble

      Who says they are fools. Guys and girls go about protecting themselves, while attempting to satisfy their desires, in different ways.

      I do, admittedly applying my own values to what is important in life. I have never met a man who was happy with nothing but casual sex. Even Dark Triad males know they’re missing out, and they tend to be unhappy for that reason. Going through life without real connection seems tragic, but feigning vulnerability to give the appearance of seeking a connection seems especially so.

  • LJ

    I’m sure his thinking was, “well I don’t really love her now but its possible I could love her once I move there and if not, at least I’ll be in a better place to find someone I really will love than where I am now.”

    Ouch, that sounds rough. Stories like that make me lean against cohabitation before engagement.

  • Cooper

    Re: “I want to see more of you”

    Well, that’s something I’d not ever think to say – haha – if I worded it it’d had “I’d like to” in it.

    I’m gonna give yours a go…

    • @Cooper

      Well, that’s something I’d not ever think to say – haha – if I worded it it’d had “I’d like to” in it.

      I’m gonna give yours a go…

      Good! Do it to the girl you kissed. Say, “I want to see you. Time to hang.” or some variation on that. I’m getting tingly just thinking about it!

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Ouch, that sounds rough. Stories like that make me lean against cohabitation before engagement.”

    The entire time I was telling him that he didn’t love me and he insisted he did. Then, he told the next woman he met online, “I never really loved her but I’m totally in love with you” the first time he flew out to see her. Then he flew back to my apartment, continued living with me for a few more weeks, then within two months was living with this other woman, got her pregnant, shot gun wedding, and is now a well kept SAHD.
    So yeah, I was in fact a launching pad for him to a better life.
    I had asked her via email if she would have married him had he not gotten her pregnant and she said, “probably not, at least not so soon”. But they’re still together, I don’t know how “happy” though considering that she works full time and he does absolutely nothing to contribute financially, though she doesn’t have to put her child in day care, and he’s got his meal ticket. I guess pretty boys can get away with this sort of thing.

  • LJ

    Wow! Sounds like you dodged a bullet though.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    LJ, I never had any intention of marrying him or having children with him and he knew that. I made that very clear from the beginning.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend, trust your instincts. LJ is right, you dodged a bullet. Forget the guy. It’s not worth your time to even think about him. It’s a new year!

  • Tom

    Eagerness early nomally implys despiration. That is rarely a good trait, male or female.

  • Cooper

    “Say, “I want to see you. Time to hang.” or some variation on that. I’m getting tingly just thinking about it!”

    That just sounds like such booty call! (I sent a variation anyways)

    Plus, what kind of person actually responds to that kind of impromptu invitations? (And doesn’t expect them to be booty calls)

    Anyways, we live an hour apart, and have busy enough lives that we can just see each other whenever one pleases – or at least I think it would be crazy to expect so.

    • That just sounds like such booty call! (I sent a variation anyways)

      Plus, what kind of person actually responds to that kind of impromptu invitations? (And doesn’t expect them to be booty calls)

      It doesn’t have to mean “get over here now.” You can follow up with a date suggestion. It’s confident and commanding. It’s a little heavy on the dominance, I admit. She liked kissing you though! Give her more of the same, with the expectation that she is interested.

  • This article is pretty spot on, and really could be gender neutral. Men and women may have different ways of doing the same thing, but in the end they usually do the same thing.

    Though, honestly, sometimes is best to overlook what may at first appear to be flaws. I mean, they are flaws, and usually people who overcommit or act clingy can actually make for decent relationships. One of my favorites was with a girl who might have otherwise been considered too “needy” by other guys.

    The sword may not cut both ways on this one, and YMMV. I think it’s easier for guys to steer a relationship on the right course than gals, but I’m a sexist so who knows…

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I want to see you. Time to hang.”

    Sounds too teenagerish. “I’d really like to spend more time with you” would probably make an adult female swoon more.

  • Cooper

    “I want to see you. Time to hang”

    Ugh, it just sounds like something Adam, from Girls, would text.
    (And, of course, not in a good way)

    • Ugh, it just sounds like something Adam, from Girls, would text.
      (And, of course, not in a good way)

      Haha, that’s true. Just don’t be Charlie.

  • WomenAreGutlessCowards

    “Your handle alone is grounds enough to spam you. Come back when you’ve had a major attitude adjustment and can speak to all here with respect.”

    So Susan Walsh doesn’t believe in free speech – and nobody here will ever know what I said that was so ‘terrible’. How convenient.

    In reality, of course, I broached the ONE taboo subject that she, like ALL women, cannot allow to be discussed: women refuse to ask men out… why?

    Steady on guys, if any of you agree with me and start asking the same question, you will probably have your posts deleted too, and that’s just how she wants it – censoring ‘inconvenient’ questions… how pathetic.

    Tell us, Susan, why don’t YOU approach men you don’t know, get rejected, and then do it all over again, until you get the man you want?

    LOL.

    • @Gutless Wonder

      So Susan Walsh doesn’t believe in free speech – and nobody here will ever know what I said that was so ‘terrible’. How convenient.

      I certainly do not believe in free speech on my private blog. Glad to clear that up. That’s why I have a comment policy. As I stated earlier, all of your comments and even your name violates my policy. You need to learn to play nice or you can’t come in to join the adults.

      Tell us, Susan, why don’t YOU approach men you don’t know, get rejected, and then do it all over again, until you get the man you want?

      OK, little whippersnapper, what PUA forum hole did you crawl out of? I’m married and old enough to be your grandma, fool.

  • Cooper

    “Haha, that’s true. Just don’t be Charlie.”

    I’d rather be Charlie than Adam. I don’t care what that might entail – he has far less serious issues than Adam; he’s far less damaged.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “So Susan Walsh doesn’t believe in free speech”

    Your free speech-text on this blog ends where Susan’s and her readership’s eyes begin.

    “and nobody here will ever know what I said that was so ‘terrible’.”

    Nor do we care.

    “How convenient”

    For us? Very.

    “In reality, of course, I broached the ONE taboo subject that she, like ALL women, cannot allow to be discussed: women refuse to ask men out…
    Tell us, Susan, why don’t YOU approach men you don’t know, get rejected, and then do it all over again, until you get the man you want?”

    Because she’s married, you fool.

    By the way, I’ve approached and asked out several men and so have my female friends. Its happening. Just not to you.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    Not to feed the troll or anything but this point has always been beaten in that a woman should never ask a guy out and all that… one thing that I didn’t have at my school but my mom and grandma have discussed was going to dances in HS (which I never did anyways) they used to have The Sadie Hawkins dances where the girls had to ask the guys. I have a hard time digesting relationship advice that advises passivity and putting up walls..it all just seems so counter productive….

    • @Society’s Disposable Son

      Ugh, I asked Ken Allebrand to the Sadie Hawkins dance, and he said, “I don’t go to that sort of thing.” Then he went with Robyn de Guevara. 🙁

      The idea that girls don’t get rejected is just false. Guys know when we’re crushing on them. One guy I really had a big crush on told my BFF that I was giving him the creeps. I guess he caught me staring once too often.

      FWIW, I’m working on a resolutions post for women, and as usual, I will recommend that women take more initiative. I don’t think they should dominate, but they should definitely be more open to suggesting a hang or something casual.

  • Ramble

    I do, admittedly applying my own values to what is important in life. I have never met a man who was happy with nothing but

    I wasn’t implying that, again, someone like Mike Tyson was happy. But that his reaction to his environment seemed understandable.

    I don’t know any of these PUAs, but I would be willing to bet that most of the “robotic” ones are fairly robotic for a reason. And I bet that if I found out those reasons, I would sympathize.

  • Ramble

    The answer is Inner Game. Work on yourself without the goal of trying to game chicks into bed. When you feel good about where you are in your life, the self-confidence that is required for mating will be real rather than cocky bluster.

    No. Straight up, no.

    This answer must be discounting STEMy Betas because most STEMy Betas that I have known have had a pretty good life outside of dating/fucking but a fairly miserable “romantic” life.

    Many of these guys are doing things that they love and are often highly respected by other very intelligent men and they are clueless when it comes to girls.

    What they need, IMO, is a whole lot of naked, un-pc truth about girls and gaming and, from there, start to develop their “inner game”.

    • What they need, IMO, is a whole lot of naked, un-pc truth about girls and gaming and, from there, start to develop their “inner game”.

      I have no problem with that, but Maven is well past that. I think he’s a PUA IIRC. It’s all Game tactics. A house of cards.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Based on the first few comments on here, it looks like drivers of those comfy white vans equipped with sirens, and stuffed with straigtjackets won’t loose their job anywhere soon.

    Through the mind aching cacophonia of your MDH overthere, I can’t help but notice that very few (if any) commentators seem to have made mention of that instinctive, sensuouslly and essentially non verbal human communication between a girl and a boy on a rendez-vous: The “colour” of the interest or intent which colours the eyes, among many other non spoken details , and which speaks volumes when properly noticed.
    As one remarked, you always know, or should feel (without words) whether to pursue the courtship or not, instead of those “force fed” verbal games of DTR’s on 1st, 2nd, 3rd dates, and so forth.
    I also notice that the way everybody seems to describe those dates/encounters or whatever between the two sexes is either as a defiant war prelude, a drag, a nerve wracking moment or at best a curious experience… but never as eagerly entering, the heart open and the prejudices down, into a new territory wrapped up in a mysterious and potentially intoxicating perfume…..well, granted, or a smell, often enough 🙂

    “6-Delaying intense intimacy, whether emotional or physical, is a woman’s best method of filtering out insincere and manipulative men.”

    Sure, but up to a point. A man confident enough and who knows about women will turn the situation to his own advantage by doing just that to have the woman running after him. It’s a fine line in both cases. But I guess the advice applies to confused college M&F students who apparently know very little about the opposite sex here.

    “He is certainly creating his own idea of his beloved as perfection. Most of us know this will wear off. ”

    Replace “He” by “She” and you’ll find men and women having one of those similar common grounds here.

    “What does bf/gf mean? Introducing your lover to your social circle? Facebook? Close friends in person? Family? ”

    Haha, good question. Just like cherry pie, it seems to me that all those labelings (among so maaany others) are very much part of americana.

    “You can be infatuated early on, but real love takes time”

    Should anything else need be said?

    “The question is, how can we sustain that idealization?”

    The idealization, or, rather, the crystalization. That is THE question at the heart of all long term couples, and a question I don’t think older couples can satisfactorily and/or honestly answer to.

  • Sassy6519

    It’s interesting that you attribute this to an introvert-extrovert difference! I’m a slight extrovert and I HATE competing with other women for men. I like the fact that there aren’t really any other women lining up to get with my BF in case we break up or something (which is what I dealt with after my high school relationship ended, and I was beside myself with fury and shame).

    The competing thing has always been an issue for me though. You can ask any regular from a year ago, I’m constantly getting my panties in a bunch about female intrasexual competition and wishing there was a way to overcome it. It’s interesting that Susan often just sees it as a fact of life. I wonder how much of that is the wisdom of age, and how much is personalized experience.

    Hmm, I think there is definitely a great deal of variation concerning the topic of competition.

    I’m very extroverted, and I can say that I have no problem engaging in “passive competition” over a guy. I would never directly fight or challenge a woman over a man, but I don’t mind knowing that there are other women out there who like the guy I’m dating/seeing.

    It’s funny, but the last few topics of discussion have been very congruent with some of my most recent dating experiences. Here is a good example of “passive competition”.

    I was invited by the guy I’m dating to a birthday party for one of his work colleagues. Before we went to the party, he informed me about a woman who he thought had a crush on him. He said that he told her about me, and that she started acting very strangely around him ever since.

    When I went to the party, this one woman made her way straight towards me. My guy introduced me to her, and she promptly gave me the catty “up and down” look. After saying a few words to me, she eventually went away. Throughout the night, however, she continued to keep an eye on he and I. The even funnier thing is that she supposedly felt the need to bombard my guy with a ton of questions about me the next day at his place of work. He told me that the questions started off as harmless curiosity, but then they eventually morphed into catty and snide remarks. He then told me that he eventually tossed a snarky comment her way, which shut her up for good.

    I guess I don’t mind that kind of competition because I’m confident in my ability to get and keep a man’s attention. Knowing that other women are attracted to my guy or like him doesn’t phase me. When a man is of high SMV, that comes with the territory.

    • @Sassy

      I’m always amazed when either sex uses transparent tactics to diss a rival. Verbal derogation of competitors is very common in mating. In fact, Athol Kay tells a story of meeting Jennifer and telling her that her boyfriend was a loser.

      Research suggests this is not effective, at least for women:

      Past research on intrasexual competition for mates has revealed at least four strategies
      that people may deploy. One of the most frequently used strategies is competitor
      derogation, such that people derogate potential rivals with respect to their appearance and
      personality. What remains unknown is how those who derogate rivals are perceived by
      others. Here we examine how female derogators are viewed by men (i.e., potential mates)
      and women (i.e., potential rivals), and investigate whether the form of derogation matters.
      We used a pre-post research design to document changes in perceptions of derogators
      who made negative statements about other women’s appearance, personality or sexuality.
      Overall, men significantly decreased their evaluations of the derogator’s friendliness,
      kindness, trustworthiness and overall desirability as a mate. Women mirrored these
      results, but also significantly decreased their views of the derogator’s fitness as a parent
      and her physical attractiveness, and in the case of appearance derogations, her
      promiscuity. We examine these results within the framework of women’s intrasexual
      competition for mates.

      http://shell.newpaltz.edu/jsec/articles/volume4/issue4/Fisher-DerVol4Iss4.pdf

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I also notice that the way everybody seems to describe those dates/encounters or whatever between the two sexes is either as a defiant war prelude, a drag, a nerve wracking moment or at best a curious experience… but never as eagerly entering, the heart open and the prejudices down, into a new territory wrapped up in a mysterious and potentially intoxicating perfume”

    Love this! 🙂

    “Delaying intense intimacy, whether emotional or physical, is a woman’s best method of filtering out insincere and manipulative men”

    Well, to reference my first comment and example, he emotionally escalated too soon and too much which made me think, “I wonder if he’s doing this because he thinks I won’t have sex with unless he talks about love”. In which case he would be wrong. I would have had sex with him regardless because I was sexually attracted to him, there was sexual chemistry between us and I desired to make love to him.
    So then I thought ok it must be something else, like he needs to get away from his miserable situation.

    Witholding intimacy from him, whether sexual or emotional, would not have changed that, and in fact DID NOT change that because I never reciprocated his “I love you’s” in their initial stages, but he kept on keeping on, because he needed a change of scenery and a launching pad into a new life.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    So much of this strikes me as ridiculous. Guys wanting a relationship with a girl just because he’s desperate? I’ve known a shit-ton of perpetually single guys, and none of them have ever, ever, ever, ever, ever done ANYTHING like this.

    Girls? Yes.

    Boys? Absolutely ridiculous. Maybe a guy right out of a relationship might just jump into this one, but I have NEVER seen a guy jump into a relationship because he was “desperate.” Just…no.

    Maybe I have a restricted view of this, I don’t know.

    I know when I had the DTR talk with my current SO, she confessed she was alternating between thinking I was a player and thinking I was desperate to have a GF. That she could hold such contradictory opinions makes me think that girls who have this mindset are projecting and suffering from some rather large insecurity issues.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    @178

    Well if a guy asks out a girl and gets rejected he should then stop and advise other guys not to do so…

  • Damien Vulaume

    “I wonder if he’s doing this because he thinks I won’t have sex with unless he talks about love”. In which case he would be wrong. I would have had sex with him regardless because I was sexually attracted to him, there was sexual chemistry between us and I desired to make love to him.”

    Sure, fair enough, if that’s how you viewed it from the begining, but that’s something else than being in a frame of mind of looking for a stable long term partner. Anyway, looks like you unfortunately found a perenial self centered pick up douche. The best thing is that you got out of it unscathed.

  • Ramble

    I have no problem with that

    Well, you said that they should pursue “Inner Game” without any interest in banging girls, which is a little like telling a guy to get healthier without any interest in breathing.

    One of the un-pc truths is that, not matter how much we enjoy relationships, few things are as exciting as conquering new pussy. Now, it is not difficult to foresee an environment where the two can meet: modest girls open to monogamous relationships.

    But, with or without that exact scenario, more young men need to internalize that having their hind brain focused on exciting sex is a good thing and nothing to be ashamed of and supported as much as any prime desire that girls have.

    • Well, you said that they should pursue “Inner Game” without any interest in banging girls, which is a little like telling a guy to get healthier without any interest in breathing.

      No, not without any interest, but what is the end goal? If it’s strictly casual, short-term sex and you’re not too picky then Game can get you there. Asshole Game will get you there fastest of all.

      If you want to sustain attraction, that’s a whole different objective, and one that requires Inner Game.

  • LJ

    “I’ve known a shit-ton of perpetually single guys, and none of them have ever, ever, ever, ever, ever done ANYTHING like this.”

    Ask your female friends. They’ll have stories of guys coming on too strong — of course your guy friends won’t tell you they’ve done this because they probably don’t even realize they came on too strong.

    “she confessed she was alternating between thinking I was a player and thinking I was desperate to have a GF.”

    Are those really contradictory though?

  • Ramble

    “I wonder if he’s doing this because he thinks I won’t have sex with unless he talks about love. In which case he would be wrong. … I desired to make love to him.”

    Always interesting.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Anyway, looks like you unfortunately found a perenial self centered pick up douche. ”

    He wasn’t a pick up artist at all. In fact he’s very monogamous and family oriented by nature.

    “I wonder if he’s doing this because he thinks I won’t have sex with unless he talks about love. In which case he would be wrong. … I desired to make love to him.”

    “Always interesting.”

    I don’t like to use the f word.

  • Sassy,

    I guess I don’t mind that kind of competition because I’m confident in my ability to get and keep a man’s attention. Knowing that other women are attracted to my guy or like him doesn’t phase me. When a man is of high SMV, that comes with the territory.

    Yeah I think this is the key difference between us. It’s not that my BF, or guys I’ve dated, are low SMV, but they aren’t the “cream of the crop,” so to speak.

    As a woman with a higher SMV, I assume you’re going to be engaging in some female intrasexual competition as you go for the top guys. As a 6ish, I simply recognize that the top guys wouldn’t be interested in me (definitely not for anything other than a ONS), so I go crazy for a guy who garners little attention from other women.

    My high school BF was such a nerd, yet he was a terrible flirt and for whatever reason, after he started dating me, other girls started noticing him. The two girls he dated after me both developed crushes on him while I was dating him. You can bet I’d noticed and already become insecure about it/given them the evil eye.

    Like I said, I’m very happy with my mostly not-in-demand BF. There are a couple girls I worry about, but my BF admits he doesn’t even know how to flirt. 😉 And that he’s not interested in anyone besides me. I believe him, considering what he’s put up with so far.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “As a woman with a higher SMV”

    What is SMV and why is Sassy’s higher?

  • INTJ

    @ Cooper, Iggles

    “Directness, in fact, will increase our opinion of him; not diminish it!”

    Well, I shall target introverts, then.

    Yup hehe.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Rebound GF
    “He wasn’t a pick up artist at all. In fact he’s very monogamous and family oriented by nature.”

    From what you described of his behavior and actions, that’s the texbook for a certain kind of pick up artists, or seducers, alphas or whatever you want to call them: A first rate deceiver in any case. Monogamous and very family oriented, the kind with a Mommy complex, hopping from one girl’s home to another, having a few kids scatered here and there. That’s exactly what my own cousin has been doing all life long. He was every time monogamous, amourous, lived in his girlfriends’ appartement while barely supporting himself on odd jobs, and then making the transition to another one with better prospects. Sometimes, he would change the script, like skipping the transition. Instead, in order to leave the gf, he would discreetly pick up his wallet and id, courageously tell her with tender eyes something along the lines of “I’m just going out to buy the newspaper, my love, do you need anything?” and then took off for ever…

  • Ramble

    If it’s strictly casual, short-term sex and you’re not too picky then Game can get you there.

    Right, but few men operate with the idea that they will strictly seek casual, short term sex. And, for those few guys that do, I am betting that something went really wrong when they were growing up and, like I said earlier, they are less likely fools to be pitied, but rather mistreated boys to, possibly, sympathize for.

  • Ramble

    What is SMV and why is Sassy’s higher?

    Sexual Market Value.

    She’s physically attractive.

  • Tomato

    Sassy, it’s interesting that your man was subtly encouraging the competition by informing you about the woman in the first place. Maybe he was trying to warn you, maybe he was trying to gauge your reaction.

  • INTJ

    @ Cooper

    I’d rather be Charlie than Adam. I don’t care what that might entail – he has far less serious issues than Adam; he’s far less damaged.

    This 100%.

  • INTJ

    @ Ramble

    The answer is Inner Game. Work on yourself without the goal of trying to game chicks into bed. When you feel good about where you are in your life, the self-confidence that is required for mating will be real rather than cocky bluster.

    No. Straight up, no.

    This answer must be discounting STEMy Betas because most STEMy Betas that I have known have had a pretty good life outside of dating/fucking but a fairly miserable “romantic” life.

    Many of these guys are doing things that they love and are often highly respected by other very intelligent men and they are clueless when it comes to girls.

    Precisely. I have half a dozen close friends who would probably place in the top 10% of the population in terms of inner game level. But only one of them has had even rudimentary success with girls.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    I’m always amazed when either sex uses transparent tactics to diss a rival.

    Me too.

    @ Olive

    As a woman with a higher SMV, I assume you’re going to be engaging in some female intrasexual competition as you go for the top guys. As a 6ish, I simply recognize that the top guys wouldn’t be interested in me (definitely not for anything other than a ONS), so I go crazy for a guy who garners little attention from other women.

    For what it’s worth, I’ve always pictured you as a young Lisa Loeb. 🙂

    @ Tomato

    Sassy, it’s interesting that your man was subtly encouraging the competition by informing you about the woman in the first place. Maybe he was trying to warn you, maybe he was trying to gauge your reaction.

    My impression was that he was genuinely trying to warn me. He did tell me about her before we went to the party, but he also followed it up by stating that he would be happy to leave the party at any time if I felt awkward or uncomfortable. He was much more concerned with whether or not she would be rude to me, which was a possibility since alcohol was a factor.

    After I learned about her, I was curious to see what she was like. She ended up being a standard blonde woman. Perhaps I’m weird, but I’ve always found such situations to be very funny, not awkward or uncomfortable.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Ask your female friends. They’ll have stories of guys coming on too strong — of course your guy friends won’t tell you they’ve done this because they probably don’t even realize they came on too strong.

    That’s different. You’re saying guys come on too strong. Sure. The impression being gathered is “desperate to have a girlfriend.” Not registering in my head.

    One is a strategy, the other is a mental state.

  • LJ

    What is a likelier explanation the kind of over-eager behavior we’re talking about (for example, pushing for very frequent communication/getting together early on)? Desperate to get laid? Could be, except sometimes it happens after sex. He’s falling for the girl? Doesn’t make sense when he barely knows her.

  • Sassy,
    Haha probably not. Here’s a recent pic:
    http://imgur.com/Ly305

    Now you can picture me as… me!

    • @Olive

      Thanks for sharing that cute pic! I love knowing what readers look like. I would give anything for your hair!

  • Sassy6519

    @ Olive

    Cute picture! 🙂

  • OMG Olive, super cute puppy!

    Also, you’re quite cute yourself. 😉 Don’t sell yourself short!

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Olive I love your hair. Sassy is that a photo of you you’ve got there?
    Olive I’d say you are of about equal ranking to Sassy (if that’s her), adjusted for your different ethnic backgrounds.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “A first rate deceiver in any case. Monogamous and very family oriented, the kind with a Mommy complex, hopping from one girl’s home to another, having a few kids scatered here and there.”

    Damien, no kids scattered here and there. He has one child with his wife. I was his launching pad to marriage and family. He is currently a very domesticated SAHD who regularly posts updates on Facebook about what words his daughter can say.

  • LJ

    Yep Olive, you and that puppy are totes adorbs 🙂

  • RE: Short-term flings. “Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn’t do than the things you did do. So throw off the bowlines, sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore.”

    -Mark Twain

    • @BB

      Mark Twain was onto something. There has been a lot of research on regret, and it turns out that 75% of regrets are for things not done.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Good one, Bastiat 😉

  • J

    Very cute pic, Olive. Your hair is amazing!

  • INTJ

    @ Olive

    Thanks for the pic! Helps me with my mental picture of you.

    Out of curiosity, how often did guys ask you out? You look very friendly and approachable.

  • Emily

    >> “In reality, of course, I broached the ONE taboo subject that she, like ALL women, cannot allow to be discussed: women refuse to ask men out…
    Tell us, Susan, why don’t YOU approach men you don’t know, get rejected, and then do it all over again, until you get the man you want?”
    > “Because she’s married, you fool.”
    —-
    LOL!!!!

    Cooper: Congrats!!!!!!!!!! Is this a new girl, or did you finally win over the famous Ms. Flaky?

    Olive: Very cute! Both you and the puppy. 🙂

  • VD

    After I learned about her, I was curious to see what she was like.

    I always found it amusing how when I started seeing a new girl, she would occasionally show up at the strip club or wherever to check out the past competition. Although the funniest example was probably when I was walking through the Mall of America with a new girl one afternoon and she asked what the previous one was like. She didn’t appear to be terribly pleased when I pointed to a twenty-foot tall picture on the side of the Nike store a few minutes later.

    The bizarre thing about it was that the Nike girl was from California and I didn’t know she’d done any modeling. She had been visiting earlier that winter, we’d gone to the mall to buy her a coat, and she was telling me about how she’d dabbled in it a little bit when she looked up, blinked a few times, and said, “actually, that’s me right there.” It was a little surreal.

  • VD

    Now you can picture me as… me!

    Olive, facially speaking, you have decent material with which to work. (Can’t see enough of the body to have an opinion.) My guess, based on your lack of makeup and your puppy, is that you’re a little too relaxed and genuine to bother most of the time and you really don’t know how to use it to your advantage. That’s fine, it’s completely up to you, but the point is that if you were to take the trouble, you’d probably be able to pull a point or two higher. I’m not saying you should, merely that the option is available to you in a way it is not to uglier girls. You, at least, don’t have to be plain.

    The vast majority of women have zero idea how to wear makeup. They all think they do, but I’ve dated a professional makeup artist as well as a number of models, and you’d be shocked at how an eight looks a ten and a six looks an eight under a sufficiently deft hand. With your pale skin and the red tones in your hair, she could easily make you look like a femme fatale. If you want to try it out, go to a very good photographer, ask him who he uses for makeup and get the phone number. Then call her, pay her for an hour of making you up professionally, and have her take a few before and after pictures of you.

    That’s your high end. That’s what you can be if you want. If you like the results, take some classes and learn how to do it yourself.

  • @Olive #201

    You resemble Olivia de Havilland.

  • Thanks all!

    INTJ,
    Not very many guys have asked me out. It’s been three and a half years since I was last single, but I was more “successful” (if you want to call it that) in the hookup scene, with guys here and there asking me to dance at frat parties and whatnot. I have no sense of what it’s like out of college, as I take pains to make myself pretty unapproachable in public. I don’t find it appropriate to make myself available when I’m taken, though I think I’ll need to switch up that attitude a bit when I go job hunting, so I don’t come off as downright cold. Thanks for the compliment!

    VD,
    Thanks for the honest assessment. I actually just bought some makeup, like two weeks ago, and am learning how to use it for the first time, at the age of 24. I wore it around my BF one day and he said he’s “not a makeup person,” which could mean a number of things but I took at face value. When I do wear it, I try to make it as natural as possible (mostly just covering blemishes and adding a tiny bit of color). Women in my family have this weird thing about worrying that they’re drawing too much attention to themselves, and I’m afraid I’ve inherited it. I’m sure I could come off a point or two higher (I’m naturally thin and very small in stature, only 4’10 1/2″) and will work to do so if my BF suddenly starts hitting the gym or something. Until then, I’ll probably wear makeup to job interviews and see where it takes me.

  • Lokland

    As a general rule enjoyment of competition is correlated with ones ability to win that competition, usually demonstrated by past performances.

    @Susan

    On the intra-sex girl dis’ing, extremely unattractive. Insta move to the slut ladder. Nothing quite as depressing as having a nice girl who you like who ends up being a complete bitch. Let down.

  • Susan Walsh:

    It’s odd – often these guys spend a great deal of time typing and articulating their thoughts, only to be put into mod or spammed.

    You may want put your moderation / censoring more visible.

    In other words there is needed for place holders for censored comments:

    <removed> January 2, 2013 at 4:35 pm 170

    This comment is removed. See Rules of Engagement.

    I do not know, if WordPress allows this.

    (But not that for these comments, which goes directly to moderation queue. )

  • Ted D

    “As a general rule enjoyment of competition is correlated with ones ability to win that competition, usually demonstrated by past performances.”

    I don’t know. Win or lose I pretty much feel the same way about competing. I’m only interested in it from a ‘whats in it for me’ perspective, and unless there is something substantial coming my way from winning, I don’t see the point in making the effort.

    Winning for the sake of winning is basically pointless IMO.

    Of course, I’m also not the type to climb a mountain simply to prove I can. I have no interest in climbing, and even if I did it, how would it change my life for the better?

  • Olive, my husband is anti-makeup as well, which suits me just fine.

    Makeup looks great in photos, but in person looks too fake or overdone. Yes you can do the “natural” look makeup, but honestly the time/effort is just not worth it. I wear contacts and tinted chapstick, ready in 10 minutes flat.

    Biggest changes come from fast things like lip color, covering up blemishes and eye definition. Spending hours will be too much in broad daylight. I think it “ages” a person, so good for a teen who wants to look older, but not great after that.

  • Damien Vulame

    Susan: “it turns out that 75% of regrets are for things not done.”

    Regrets, ah, regrets… that needle-aching part of one’s heart’s memory.
    To me, regrets are 100% related to things we haven’t done, whereas the rest would be rather called remorses instead.
    My grand father, who was a caricature of the galant yet proud French man from past lost generations (complete with a daily-wearing beret, but no mustache, lol), used to tell me (in a thunderous voice, raising ceremoniously up from his chair), when I was in my late teens and would turn to him to confide about a girl dilema of mine: „Listen to me you little boy, it’s better to have remorses than regrets! Now, and this is between us, since today your grandmother’s radar eyes are away for a while (and he would briefly anxiously glance around to make sure it was the case), let’s finnish this bottle of wine together and you tell me why you haven’t approached this little flower of yours yet! Here’s your glass!“
    The grandmother in question was the proud one you said you would have liked to have a glass of wine with. They were a funny and endearing couple. Always confronting each other with that proud declamatory style, yet never hurting each other. It was like a live theater play everytime. They remained faithfull to each other until the end. But these were other times, hardly duplicable in today’s culture.

    • @Damien

      I wish I could know your grandparents today. What a wonderful story. The wit and humor exemplified in that anecdote makes me long for something very different.

      As a lifelong Francophile, I especially enjoy your Gallic perspective. You have a healthier way of looking at human interactions than we Americans do, by a mile.

  • Hope,
    So funny how similar your hubby and my BF are!

    Yes you can do the “natural” look makeup, but honestly the time/effort is just not worth it. I wear contacts and tinted chapstick, ready in 10 minutes flat.

    That’s basically how I feel about makeup too. I could afford to look a couple years older since I’m so small and look so young (a distant relative at Thanksgiving thought I was 15), so that’s why I’m open to it for job searching purposes. But at home I definitely pass.

  • Damien Vulame

    “Olive, facially speaking, you have decent material with which to work. (Can’t see enough of the body to have an opinion.)”…

    ROFL. I’m sure such “compliments” would make any woman in Europe melt with burning desires, and that your advices would be received with grateful aknowledgement. Sarcasm aside, I sure you don’t plan to live in that part of the world, so you’ll be just fine.

  • Cooper

    @Emily
    Lol. *nods*

  • (Well, I’m not girl so I should not comment this either. )

    Maven7:

    Girls, I have a question: assuming that average guy has no game at all, how would you expect him to go trough all this hurdles?

    Perhaps guys go trough when women notice that hurdles is too much. On some point there no much guys waiting for testing. In that point women notice that they need take initiative.

    (Well, Susan Walsh answered to that.)

    / Kari Hurtta

    ( women, not girls )

  • Stickwick

    @ Damien: “ROFL. I’m sure such “compliments” would make any woman in Europe melt with burning desires, and that your advices would be received with grateful aknowledgement. Sarcasm aside, I sure you don’t plan to live in that part of the world, so you’ll be just fine.”

    What makes you think the comment was intended as anything but helpful? Not every man responds to a woman to elicit desire; though, ironically, comments such as VD’s are generally better received by women than fawning, insincere flattery. It looks like Olive took it in the intended spirit. Incidentally, VD has been living in Europe for some time now.

  • Susan Walsh:

    FWIW, I’m working on a resolutions post for women, and as usual, I will recommend that women take more initiative. I don’t think they should dominate, but they should definitely be more open to suggesting a hang or something casual.

    Taking initiative is always required at least some degree (from both partners). Otherwise it does not work. Of course it varies how much is needed. We at least agreed that playing Principle of Least Interest (PLI) is downward spiral.

  • Ted D:

    I never had the DTR talk with my first two LTR mates, because they were both rather shy and clearly had limited dating experience.

    Same here. I never had Define the Relationship (DTR) -talk.

    / Kari Hurtta

    (Steps was other. Also steps perhaps not are very well aligned with goal of that blog.)

  • OffTheCuff

    DV: that kind of positive male role-model the kind of stuff entirely absent in many men’s lives. One conversation like that would made a huge difference in my life.

    Olive: you’ve got the girl-next-door thing down. Heck, I married one. While Vox isnt incorrect about the makeup thing boosting your look, life and love is far more than just SMV maximization of your mate. If you’re happy being an above-average