Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah it worked on me at first, I’m turned off completely by neediness. After awhile (a couple months) I started telling him that I can’t tell if he really even likes me or what. This baffled him. He never tried to change that though, so I ended it, regretfully.
It just wasn’t going to work out Long Term. What makes me excited to be with someone, or even fall in love with them, is the way I feel when I’m with them. I didn’t feel very attractive or wanted, knowing he responds instantly to messages when I was with him, but could take hours to reply to me.
It was fun at first, because he was very attractive, but a “challenge” isn’t a long term goal. It’s just something to do if you’re bored.
YOU read again. You didn't ask about "either behavior," and she didn't **actually** answer the question you asked.
Sure, you can assess their reactions, but if you're a guy trying to decide whether to employ this specific, deliberate behavior in order to attract women, which is what your thread is about, all that matters is whether the guy was trying to be hard to get or whether his natural personality is just aloof.
That's the flawed assumption here. If a guy wasn't really trying to be hard to get, if he just IS naturally reticent and chill, it doesn't help a guy who is really outgoing, insecure and compulsive.
I disagree, you are wrong. She, like others, did provide very useful answers to my point. I am not going to pursue this discussion with you nor to reply anymore, it would be a waste of time.
I disagree, and think that you are wrong. She, like others, did provide very useful answers to my point. I am not going to pursue this discussion with you nor to reply anymore, it would be a waste of time.
I'm seeing a lot of prickly vibes around here, and I'm not real sure why... goodness.
I actually think that this question is valid, there's a lot of conflicting advice out there for people in dating. Maybe it was stated a little awkwardly but come on, the gist wasn't that unclear.
And I think that the answer was, more than anything, strive to be genuine, to be both interesting and interested. And as confusing as it might sound...try to strike a balance. You do not want to seem needy, thirsty or desperate, no. But you also don't want to seem emotionally unavailable, cynical, aloof, or disinterested.
The vibe I really want from a guy in the early stages, says to me, "I find you appealing and attractive, I would be enthusiastic about spending some time getting to know you, if you're down for that. But if you don't share my interest, you can feel comfortable saying no, because I'm not going to be sitting at home weeping by the phone over a woman I don't even know. I've got a life, and I'm happy and resilient enough not to fly to pieces over nothing, after all. I'll be over here enjoying my sunny day and if you wanna come on down and enjoy it with me, well come on along ya pretty lady, and let's have a date!"
I would not suggest those exact words, I'm saying that is the impression that appeals most. A man who is living a good life, with a good attitude, and has a genuine interest in me, not to fill a hole of desperate loneliness or cast a line to his lost and drowning self, but rather to come share in happiness WITH him, that he already has goin' on. And he can take me or leave me in the early stages because his sun is gonna keep right on shining no matter.
If I say yes to this imaginary man (for a date, for whatever) then he is happy happy, we're gonna have a great time.
If I say no, he will say, "OK well best wishes to you!" and he'll mean that.
Imagine "I don't care" in a negative way...that is not anything to strive for. Imagine "it's good either way" in a positive tone...that's more the thing. Carefree positivity rather than just aloof coolness. Sunshine, not shade. And speaking of shade, never, ever, deploy the tactic known as "negging." Just don't. Whether it "works" or it doesn't, it makes you a jerk for doing it. It's never good.
That is a very smart way to see this matter, Sonic_Spork, I wish this was the way in which both men and women think.
Yeah it worked on me at first, I’m turned off completely by neediness. After awhile (a couple months) I started telling him that I can’t tell if he really even likes me or what. This baffled him. He never tried to change that though, so I ended it, regretfully.
It just wasn’t going to work out Long Term. What makes me excited to be with someone, or even fall in love with them, is the way I feel when I’m with them. I didn’t feel very attractive or wanted, knowing he responds instantly to messages when I was with him, but could take hours to reply to me.
It was fun at first, because he was very attractive, but a “challenge” isn’t a long term goal. It’s just something to do if you’re bored.
IME
Great point. There's definitely an expiration date to this sort of thing.
I think this works on women (it has also worked on me) because when you see a man who is about his business and doesn't just chase after every woman he sees, it is such a great feeling when you are finally able to captivate him. Men know this, that's often why they employ this tactic. And also why some women do the same to men.
All that being said, there is a difference between being reserved/modest while getting to know someone & taking it slow early on (i.e. not prioritizing a "stranger") versus completely messing with someone's head in order to trick them into liking you.
Being fake won't get you very far in life, period.
When I opened this thread, I thought it was going to be about girls playing hard to get. But, guys?
(emphasis mine)
You replied with:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathias_north
Yes, that is what I meant. Was I unclear in my OP?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathias_north
I made a mistake in post #29: I was talking about guys playing hard to get...
... thus I was not doing it wrong.
But in your original post you are clearly talking about guys playing hard to get. Hence my comment. I don't know what you're thinking only what you actually post. Hence my comment.
Early 40s. If I am very very interested, it wont matter either way. Im not going to lose my very very interested level because he texts me too much. I will love it. (If he freaks when I havent responded to his text immediately otoh, I will get wary.) But if he is as enthisiastically into me as I am into him, that is the best.
If I'm on the fence about a guy, I am more likely to get more interested in him if he doesnt overwhelm me with texts and attention. I only enioy that extreme attention from guys I am equally into.
I have known some guys recently that wanted to text all day nonstop. They expected me to be on call 24/7 to text with them. I have things to do. If I said, "I need to go do this now, lets text later." They got upset! Red flag there, and a turn off. If I was on the fence before, it did not get me very very interested.
If those guys had texted me infrequently, played hard to get, there is a chance I would have become very very interested. But instead I felt pressued, and put upon. Like it was a daily chore I had to take care of.
So if the girl is into you, text and call all you want. It wont make her less into you.
But if she's not into you, play it more cool, until she is. If you must err, err on the side of hard to get instead of clingy.
Thank you for the nice answer, moongirl00, very interesting.
Great point. There's definitely an expiration date to this sort of thing.
...I think this works on women (it has also worked on me) because when you see a man who is about his business and doesn't just chase after every woman he sees, it is such a great feeling when you are finally able to captivate him. Men know this, that's often why they employ this tactic. And also why some women do the same to.
Right, I told my self we all have Love Languages. It was too hard to find a pattern for his though. Looking back I think it was the halo effect. I just wanted it to be “his style” but I wasn’t getting what I needed, so that counts more.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
