Jump to content

Does it sound like he is contradicting himself?


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 don't get it either because I still don't know what these hypothetical type of guys aren't giving you. I don't see any distinction. The only thing I can think of is you want the guy to constanly prove somehow his devotion and attachment to you. I assume this would give you security. But wouldn't this risk being too much too fast? And wouldn't this be a huge risk of loss if you decided to pull away or walk away? If you want devotion you have to reward and reciprocate devotion. But if not that, I'm not sure what it is exactly that these "other types" of guys aren't giving?

 

The distinction is the level of emotional support that she senses from the guy. That's what these other types of guys aren't giving. She feels less emotional support from the non-committal guy because he wants sex and companionship (perks) without the feelings of devotion and attachment (risks). She wants to feel that he's willing to risk breaking his heart for her. Him refusing that and keeping his other options open makes her feel that the relationship and she are less important/special. At least that's what I think she means.

Posted

I'm just wondering what kind of responses did you expect when you posted a "personal" on craig's list? sorry, don't mean to judge or anything...

  • Author
Posted
I'm just wondering what kind of responses did you expect when you posted a "personal" on craig's list? sorry, don't mean to judge or anything...

 

As I mentioned, it was just a venting post. Wasn't expecting any responses.

  • Author
Posted
The distinction is the level of emotional support that she senses from the guy. That's what these other types of guys aren't giving. She feels less emotional support from the non-committal guy because he wants sex and companionship (perks) without the feelings of devotion and attachment (risks). She wants to feel that he's willing to risk breaking his heart for her. Him refusing that and keeping his other options open makes her feel that the relationship and she are less important/special. At least that's what I think she means.

 

Thanks for trying. Kind of not even that detailed because that kind of guy I wouldn't even give that much consideration to.

 

Plainly a guy who wants the company and sex but not commit. Only wants to see you when he needs a companion, he doesn't deserve my time (or any woman's). I get mad because those guys think that there is nothing wrong with that, that they should have those perks without as you said attachment, devotion, caring, risk and anything else involved with a growing relationship. They act like those things are a pain, waste of time or effort when the joke is on them, because they are also perks that they are missing.

Posted
Thanks for trying. Kind of not even that detailed because that kind of guy I wouldn't even give that much consideration to.

 

Plainly a guy who wants the company and sex but not commit. Only wants to see you when he needs a companion, he doesn't deserve my time (or any woman's). I get mad because those guys think that there is nothing wrong with that, that they should have those perks without as you said attachment, devotion, caring, risk and anything else involved with a growing relationship. They act like those things are a pain, waste of time or effort when the joke is on them, because they are also perks that they are missing.

 

OK but when you say "(those guys) don't deserve any woman's time" you are assuming that every girl wants a guy to always be around and be commited in order to have sex with him. Most guys want a commitment, they just don't want to commit themselves to a girl who does appreciate, reward, and reciprocate with commitment and devotion. Read my thread "What is love?" for insight on some reasons why a guy might be hesitant to commit.

 

If you want commitment and devotion and you are offering that to the other person then of course you deserve the same. There's plenty of guys that will give that too in due time. If you're not finding them, then you are expecting commitment up front, picking the wrong guys or something along those lines.

  • Author
Posted
OK but when you say "(those guys) don't deserve any woman's time" you are assuming that every girl wants a guy to always be around and be commited in order to have sex with him.

 

No because I'm not talking about just sex or F*ck Buddy. That is fine and a different situation, if both want only that then have fun.

 

Most guys want a commitment, they just don't want to commit themselves to a girl who does appreciate, reward, and reciprocate with commitment and devotion. Read my thread "What is love?" for insight on some reasons why a guy might be hesitant to commit.

 

If you want commitment and devotion and you are offering that to the other person then of course you deserve the same. There's plenty of guys that will give that too in due time. If you're not finding them, then you are expecting commitment up front, picking the wrong guys or something along those lines.

 

:rolleyes: Shaking my head. Where did I say it had anything to do with wanting commitment up front? That is mental.

 

 

 

For the last time we aren't talking about guys who want to commitment. Not talking about most guys.

Posted
Thanks for trying. Kind of not even that detailed because that kind of guy I wouldn't even give that much consideration to.

 

Well yeah, obviously it doesn't really go that deep in most cases... but I was going into that much detail to try to explain what underlies the distinction and to show why it's difficult to explain in logical terms. I don't think he quite gets it because the distinction is subjective (varies person to person) and emotionally based (thus not really grounded in logic).

 

This is also why you two are arguing in circles. He's asking you to explain emotions in logical terms, which you can't really do. I'm not saying you care about the non-committal guys because I think once they admit they're not looking for commitment, you stop considering them. However, I'm saying where you are coming from is still emotional because even after you recognize those guys as not your type, you still let what they want make you mad to the extent that you say they don't deserve any woman's time, which is illogical because you can't speak for all women. The bottom line is those guys aren't necessarily wrong or wrong for all women, they are just wrong for you.

Posted
No because I'm not talking about just sex or F*ck Buddy. That is fine and a different situation, if both want only that then have fun.

 

I know you're not talking about just sex or f*ck buddies, but outside of marriage there isn't a set standard or legally binded definition to a girlfriend/boyfriend relationship. Relationships are defined by the people in them. Since some types of guys admit they don't want commitment, unless they are demanding that from you, you can't hold them to the standards of a committed relationship. Clearly they aren't your type, so you just look elsewhere.

Posted
I know you're not talking about just sex or f*ck buddies, but outside of marriage there isn't a set standard or legally binded definition to a girlfriend/boyfriend relationship. Relationships are defined by the people in them. Since some types of guys admit they don't want commitment, unless they are demanding that from you, you can't hold them to the standards of a committed relationship. Clearly they aren't your type, so you just look elsewhere.

 

 

Yeah she's complaining about guys being unwilling to meet some vague, undefined standard in order to deserve a sexual relationship with her. If the standard is undefined then it can never really be met or satisfied. The most aggravating things is, and no offense to anyone on here, this forum is choked full of stories of one girl or another having sexual relations with a guy who is not commital because the chemistry was so high.

 

 

I even explained to her that many guys do want a commited and devoted relationship and many times it's the woman turning him down. I even explained what a girl should do to best encourage a guy to be devoted and I even explained why he would be hesitant to be devoted and commited. Yet she still says I'm clueless. It goes back to the point of her having an undefined standard that can never be met or satisfied.

Posted
Yeah she's complaining about guys being unwilling to meet some vague, undefined standard in order to deserve a sexual relationship with her. If the standard is undefined then it can never really be met or satisfied. The most aggravating things is, and no offense to anyone on here, this forum is choked full of stories of one girl or another having sexual relations with a guy who is not commital because the chemistry was so high.

 

 

I even explained to her that many guys do want a commited and devoted relationship and many times it's the woman turning him down. I even explained what a girl should do to best encourage a guy to be devoted and I even explained why he would be hesitant to be devoted and commited. Yet she still says I'm clueless. It goes back to the point of her having an undefined standard that can never be met or satisfied.

 

No, it's not undefined, it's just defined by her. It's personal, which is why it might seem vague to you or someone else. Nothing wrong with that. It's her decision who she feels is worth getting into a relationship with/sleeping with and who isn't. If she feels the guy is worth explaining it to, then she'll do it. If not, then so be it. Personally I think she's better off with someone who seems to understand her from the start.

Posted
No, it's not undefined, it's just defined by her. .

 

 

Same difference really.

  • Author
Posted
Well yeah, obviously it doesn't really go that deep in most cases... but I was going into that much detail to try to explain what underlies the distinction and to show why it's difficult to explain in logical terms. I don't think he quite gets it because the distinction is subjective (varies person to person) and emotionally based (thus not really grounded in logic).

 

This is also why you two are arguing in circles. He's asking you to explain emotions in logical terms, which you can't really do. I'm not saying you care about the non-committal guys because I think once they admit they're not looking for commitment, you stop considering them. However, I'm saying where you are coming from is still emotional because even after you recognize those guys as not your type, you still let what they want make you mad to the extent that you say they don't deserve any woman's time, which is illogical because you can't speak for all women. The bottom line is those guys aren't necessarily wrong or wrong for all women, they are just wrong for you.

 

I know and thank you for trying to explain it to him, though I don't think it's helping. No I can't speak for all woman but I still feel that men that think they would get everything and not give anything don't deserve the woman's time.

 

My guess about the guy's email that I was asking about it right. I asked him to explain and he says "Don't want a relationship, but yeah i want to spend good times with one girl". Combined with his first email means to me that obviously doesn't want a gf but wants one girl to spend time with and have sex with but won't commit to her. :mad:

  • Author
Posted
I know you're not talking about just sex or f*ck buddies, but outside of marriage there isn't a set standard or legally binded definition to a girlfriend/boyfriend relationship. Relationships are defined by the people in them. Since some types of guys admit they don't want commitment, unless they are demanding that from you, you can't hold them to the standards of a committed relationship. Clearly they aren't your type, so you just look elsewhere.

 

True but when the guy says straight out he doesn't want a relationship, but whats the company and sex. That is a step up from FB. But won't become a relationship. I don't hold them to the standard of a commited relationship, I just don't think someone should expect the perks and not have any commitment. Give anything back.

 

You can't make them want one and can't help what they think they can get without effort. Yes still makes me mad because of the nerve, but they will never get that from me and I'm not looking at them for anything anyway lol. Yet keep asking. :rolleyes:

  • Author
Posted
Same difference really.

 

:rolleyes:

  • Author
Posted
Yeah she's complaining about guys being unwilling to meet some vague, undefined standard in order to deserve a sexual relationship with her. If the standard is undefined then it can never really be met or satisfied. The most aggravating things is, and no offense to anyone on here, this forum is choked full of stories of one girl or another having sexual relations with a guy who is not commital because the chemistry was so high.

 

I even explained to her that many guys do want a commited and devoted relationship and many times it's the woman turning him down. I even explained what a girl should do to best encourage a guy to be devoted and I even explained why he would be hesitant to be devoted and commited. Yet she still says I'm clueless. It goes back to the point of her having an undefined standard that can never be met or satisfied.

 

I haven't read all the stories of other woman your talking about, but I doubt that they were happy in the end. Also they have nothing to do with me or my point.

 

Eric82, correct me if I am wrong but I don't think you were agreeing with TheFonz or backing his opinion.

You can't encourage a guy to be devoted if he said flat out, he doesn't want a relationship and you can't convince yourself that you can change him.

Posted
True but when the guy says straight out he doesn't want a relationship, but whats the company and sex. That is a step up from FB. But won't become a relationship. I don't hold them to the standard of a commited relationship, I just don't think someone should expect the perks and not have any commitment. Give anything back.

 

And I said from the beginning that the guy in quetion never flat out siad he didn't want a relationship.

 

You can't make them want one and can't help what they think they can get without effort. Yes still makes me mad because of the nerve, but they will never get that from me and I'm not looking at them for anything anyway lol. Yet keep asking. :rolleyes:

 

And I say you can make a guy want to have a relationship with you, just like you can make him not want one. You're making it sound like your behavior and actions have no influence over this but it does.

  • Author
Posted
And I said from the beginning that the guy in quetion never flat out said he didn't want a relationship.

 

And I say you can make a guy want to have a relationship with you, just like you can make him not want one. You're making it sound like your behavior and actions have no influence over this but it does.

 

When I brought up these kind of guys I didn't say that the email guy did, I said I hoped he wasn't that kind of guy. But now I know he is. Said 100% that he doesn't want a relationship, just all he things what go with having a GF.

 

Ok yes you can make not want one with you, but you can't make someone want a relationship when they don't. You shouldn't have to change someone to make them fit you anyway! Move on and find someone who is.

Posted

Ok yes you can make not want one with you, but you can't make someone want a relationship when they don't. You shouldn't have to change someone to make them fit you anyway! Move on and find someone who is.

 

 

So you ascribe to the theory of find a man that has already been changed (or at least pretends to be) into the type you want. What's wrong with thinking you can change a man for the better, and make a "nonrelationship guy" into a "relationship guy" :laugh:?

  • Author
Posted
So you ascribe to the theory of find a man that has already been changed (or at least pretends to be) into the type you want. What's wrong with thinking you can change a man for the better, and make a "nonrelationship guy" into a "relationship guy" :laugh:?

 

Already been changed, that doesn't make sense. That he doesn't need to be, already whats what you want. No one is perfect, just perfect for you and the little things that aren't don't need to be fixed/changed.

 

:rolleyes:

Posted
So you ascribe to the theory of find a man that has already been changed (or at least pretends to be) into the type you want.

 

No, believe it or not, there are guys out there who she doesn't have to change or mold, and who don't have to pretend, because they are already naturally what she's looking for. Just because you don't fit her type or understand her doesn't mean other guys don't.

 

What's wrong with thinking you can change a man for the better, and make a "nonrelationship guy" into a "relationship guy" :laugh:?

 

I know you're joking :D

Posted

Eric82, correct me if I am wrong but I don't think you were agreeing with TheFonz or backing his opinion.

 

You're correct. I wasn't backing his opinion.

Posted
No, believe it or not, there are guys out there who she doesn't have to change or mold, and who don't have to pretend, because they are already naturally what she's looking for. Just because you don't fit her type or understand her doesn't mean other guys don't.

 

 

Nah I think she would just mold to them and her perception about them would cange, but they wouldn't necessarily want a relationship.

Posted
You're correct. I wasn't backing his opinion.

 

So are you just pretending you think what a girl wants you to think :p?

  • Author
Posted
Nah I think she would just mold to them and her perception about them would cange, but they wouldn't necessarily want a relationship.

 

So are you just pretending you think what a girl wants you to think :p?

 

What? lol Did that make sense to anyone but him?

×
×
  • Create New...