Jump to content
While the thread author can add an update and reopen discussion, this thread was last posted in over a month ago. Want to continue the conversation? Feel free to start a new thread instead!

Recommended Posts

Posted

I know, I know, that book came out over a decade ago. However, a freind gave it to me and i must say it definitely seems the way to go. Pursuing the man, being too available, all bad; playing hard to get but easy to be with seems good. I was just wondering how long to use it; or how easy going should you be, when sometimes you just want to be Bitch-enstein and let the BF know you won't be treated ike a doormat. Anyone follow the rules, had success with them, or gave up? They are from our grandmothers day, but def. seem to have merit....Advise, please!!

Posted

I think I read it once, long ago.

 

I think the principles are basically okay - if I remember right it sort of boils down to:

 

-respect yourself

-don't be a doormat

-have your own life

-don't let your life revolve around a guy

 

Those I can live by. Taking those further into rules like "don't accept a weekend date after Wednesday" is dumb and limiting. In my opinion.

Posted

I would relabel "Don't be a doormat" to the more general "assert yourself."

 

I think this is better, because it relates to both positive and negative aspects of the relationship. For example, looking back I now know that at times I was taking advantage of my girlfriend being a door mat. However, a lot of times, I had no other choices. If I asked where she wanted to go, or what she wanted to do, her reply was always "I don't know" or "I don't care". Even I came up with an idea and asked her opinion, I got the same reply. For example, I asked her once a day in advance to come up with ideas for our next date, because it seemed like most of the stuff we had done was left up to me. When I called the next day, I got the same reply as usual. But I knew subconsicously that she was getting upset, because she wasn't getting what she wanted from me, but those type of things that she wasn't getting weren't my fault. Of course there are general things that people should just know to do in a relationship (like call your gf/bf often). But even she couldn't do that, even when she was dying to talk to me. And why is that? Because she couldn't assert herself.

Posted

I must read it!

 

I'm pretty good about having my own life, not being too availabe, and I'm not really clingy. But being a doormat has always been a problem, I'm getting better but it's easy to slip back into it.

  • Author
Posted

See, as "guest"wrote yesterday, not sure how far to take being easy going and avialble. for example, the book says let the man make the plans, let him be the aggressor, cause men like the chase and easy to be with women and all. and that's fine..but then again shouldnt you speak up for youself? like if my BF wants chinese food and i had it for lunch, can't i say that and i feel like italian food? stuff like that confuses me..."guest" said he doesnt like to make all th eplans, contadicting the book!!

also with sex, they say well, men shoudl initate it otherwise your "emasculating" them...but my BF says he LOVES it when i initaite and act all into it and interested. its sort of conflicting, i think. but i def. recommend reading it if you've been sorta wishy-washy. cause most of it is really about kind of manipulating men,but really so that you get what you want, that is, a loving man who's into you and pursues you, can't wait to see you, wouldnt' dream of cheating on you. the book def. has its pluses, but i just wonder how far to take things. do men really like to make all the plans??

Posted

I think books that tell you how to "trap" a man are stupid. Just be yourself because that's what is going to come out in the end anyway. If you are not the type of girl the "rule book" says you should be, then the person you are trying to "trap" will see that and you will look really stupid. Any action you start you will have to keep up. If a guy falls in love with a girl he thinks is independent then finds out she was just acting that way to get him but is really needy and wants to be available to him all the time...what good has acting independent done for her?

Posted

The stuff in this book will only drive a man up the wall. Game playing is never a good way to start off a relationship. I would say just be yourself and be natural so when you do find a guy the relationship will have a good start.

Posted
I would say just be yourself and be natural so when you do find a guy the relationship will have a good start.

 

That's the best way to go.

 

My friends try to follow "The Rules" and since their still single, I'm assuming it doesn't work. Sure some have worked for others but being yourself is what I have found to be the best thing.:)

Posted
I would say just be yourself and be natural

which also includes taking human nature into account. the "rules" are based upon human nature.

Posted

Rules are for robots.

 

Concept of the rules is.....act like healthy confident and attractive woman....mimic her. Attractive and healthy women have lot of opportunities so they are more busy and less available. Mimic it.

 

Goal should be to become healthy confident woman. Get rid of inferiority complexes, dont think a boyfriend will heal all your problems etc. Be cool positive.....change your inner core. Unless you are very good actor 24/7 you wont have success with acting only.

 

Do men like to hunt? Yes we love to hunt....deer not women (mass murderer has different views probably).

And even a deer can frustrate us when it is escaping for too long.

 

Playing hard to get...thats what rules are about....is good only in one case - when man has insincere intetions....hit and run it is called. Then you frustrate him very early and he leaves.

 

If he is sincere about you your games will hurt him, because he will think you are not sure about him. Or if he is experinced he will see it as childish games and loose respect for you....and leave.

Posted
If he is sincere about you your games will hurt him, because he will think you are not sure about him. Or if he is experinced he will see it as childish games and loose respect for you....and leave.

but you forget DM that the "rules" is a superb way of seperating the men from the boys and the sincere from the insincere.

Posted
but you forget DM that the "rules" is a superb way of seperating the men from the boys and the sincere from the insincere.

 

I actually mentioned its benefits....the hit and run case. In the case of separating boys from men Im not so convinced about its positive benefits for girls. Quality man dont play power games with women....he will next her for reasons I proposed.

 

If I find the girl attractive (whole package) Im not turned off by signs of high interest quite the opposite. Calling back, making time for somebody and not desparately hiding interest level is not clingines.

 

Holding cards too close to the chest is sign that you have some bad cards. Just dont hold the cards bad side out.

Posted
If I find the girl attractive (whole package) Im not turned off by signs of high interest quite the opposite. Calling back, making time for somebody and not desparately hiding interest level is not clingines.

You should read the "rules" DM before you pass judgement. No where do they say to "desperately hide interest level". What they say is to temper your interest level so you're more objective and don't come off as needy and clingy.

 

If everyone desperately hid their interest level then the human race would die off as we know it. And in reality, the "rules" apply to both men and women.

Posted
You should read the "rules" DM before you pass judgement. No where do they say to "desperately hide interest level". What they say is to temper your interest level so you're more objective and don't come off as needy and clingy.

 

If everyone desperately hid their interest level then the human race would die off as we know it. And in reality, the "rules" apply to both men and women.

 

I read it AM. And Im not saying the rules propose to desparately hide interest level but it seems to me that when your interest level is under your control so you can be objective there is no need to never call first etc. BECAUSE when you ARE in control of your emotions you wont come off as needy and clingy when you do call first, make time etc..

 

Authors should point out inner game (objective self worth, self esteem) is more important than the outer game. And I think they take it from one extreme to other. Todays society is example....emotionally wrecked, frustrated girls and boys who franticaly shield their fragile egos with fake confidence and power games.

Posted
Todays society is example....emotionally wrecked, frustrated girls and boys who franticaly shield their fragile egos with fake confidence and power games.

That is more due to the emasculation of men than anything else. If men acted more like men then there would be no problem.

Posted
That is more due to the emasculation of men than anything else. If men acted more like men then there would be no problem.

 

Yeah, if men acted like men and women acted like women. And all of them acted like mentally strong, balanced human beings it would be...paradise? :D

 

But we diverted a bit.

 

I recognise two kind of games:

 

Good games....to catch a girl/boy one like.

Evil games...to feed ego.

 

The good games should weed out those who play the evil games and of course those who are not entairly OK. So it is some kind of test. Testing someone too much is disrespectful. If she throws too much tests it also shows that she is very insecure (need to protect her too fragile ego). Emotional stability is very important factor in choosing the right woman. And there is the possibility she is playing the evil game.....only to feed her ego by your attention.

 

So dont over do.

Posted
Emotional stability is very important factor in choosing the right woman. .

I've never met an "emotionally stable" woman. By definition their lives revolve around their own emotions and feelings.

Posted
I've never met an "emotionally stable" woman.

 

From my observation, we tend to attract that of which we are.

Posted
From my observation, we tend to attract that of which we are.

From by observations, we tend to attract that which is opposite of what we are

Posted
From my observation, we tend to attract that of which we are.

 

I have always thought it was the exact opposite..

We have a tendency to look for in others the things we do not have.

Posted
I have always thought it was the exact opposite..

We have a tendency to look for in others the things we do not have.

yea thats what i said....who wants to date themselves?

Posted
I've never met an "emotionally stable" woman. By definition their lives revolve around their own emotions and feelings.

 

Ive met a lot of woman more emotionaly stable than most of men. Generally speaking woman are more emotional.

 

Emotionally stable....you can cope with ups and downs.no serious drama. she doesnt take herself too seriously.

 

Emotionally unstable....you want to run. She is emotional junkie.

Posted
Ive met a lot of woman more emotionaly stable than most of men. .

hahhahahhahh aha hahaah a hah ah hah a a ha hah ahhahaha ha hahah ah ahaah.....what planet you live on?

Posted
I have always thought it was the exact opposite..

We have a tendency to look for in others the things we do not have.

 

I think others seek a connection.

 

Ever notice how the angry person seems to meet up with the jerks of the world?

 

Whereas if you're nice to people you're treated nicely in return?

Posted
I have always thought it was the exact opposite..

We have a tendency to look for in others the things we do not have.

 

You are both right. People tend to add missing POSITIVE genes actually.

×
×
  • Create New...