brenda collins Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 So a few of you may have read the book and now seen the movie!! what do you all reckon is the only reason why a guy wont commit to you or call you because he is just not that into you or can there be other reasons?? Let me know what you all think... would be good to have a few guys perspectives on this one too!
Lizzie60 Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 Haven't read the book.. haven't seen the movie.. but let me tell you one thing.. I honestly think that when a guy is really interested.. he will call.. he will cancel whatever he has to see you.. it might not be 'right away' the next minute or the next day.. but he will certainly not go a week without at least calling you...
Geraltt Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 Haven't read the book or seen the movie. But here's a bit from my perspective: For a man - not a boy, but a man - a relationship is only rarely the #1 priority in his life. A good man will have a lot going on in his life between career, community, finances, family and other pressures. A relationship with his SO is only part of his life, not the whole thing. So if a guy doesn't call, it might mean he's just not into you, or it might mean that he's busy with other aspects of his life. And if a woman WANTS her man to call, then she's gonna have to make it clear. Men can't read minds. It's not rocket science.
Trialbyfire Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 For a man - not a boy, but a man - a relationship is only rarely the #1 priority in his life. A good man will have a lot going on in his life between career, community, finances, family and other pressures. I couldn't disagree more. A good man who's all in, will prioritize his relationship over everything else. This doesn't mean he'll ignore the rest since he's still got a life. A man who prioritizes everything in his life, is going to be one highly stressed man. If one aspect of his life goes bad, he's going to lose focus on the rest of his life.
LoveLace Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 I do believe in what you call "other reasons"....I have known guys that no matter how interested they may be, they are determined not to fully commit until they feel financially stable enough or something in their own life might hold them back no matter who the gal is. If there's anything that might keep them from being able to make her happy in the way she deserves, then he'll either just say so or instead just come off as "not that into her". The problem comes when a woman doesn't take things like this seriously and continues to think that she can get the guy to commit to her....because all other signs point to love or whatever...when guys have their mind made up, it's made up and that's it...then she can choose to either wait for his issues to resolve (not usually a good idea) or move on. The better way to go would be to respect whatever his issues are and when you move on, you may or may not still be available if he calls up one day and says, "Ok! I'm ready!" (rarely happens I"m sure). In other words it seems guys are more willing to commit and appear more "into you" when most or all other aspects of their life are satisfactory or stable. Not to say that men OR women don't use life-issues as just an excuse not to commit, because they do...either way, it's probably a sign to just move on.
Geraltt Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 I couldn't disagree more. A good man who's all in, will prioritize his relationship over everything else. This doesn't mean he'll ignore the rest since he's still got a life. A man who prioritizes everything in his life, is going to be one highly stressed man. If one aspect of his life goes bad, he's going to lose focus on the rest of his life. I see where you're coming from, but I still don't buy it. Dropping other important things in one's life for the relationship might be important on rare circumstances but as an all-encompassing overridding theme it's a recipe for disaster. I know, I lived it. Been there, done that. Bought the t-shirt, wore the sucker threadbare.
spookie Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 In my copious experience with dating boys, at the start sometimes they don't call cause you scare them.
Author brenda collins Posted February 8, 2009 Author Posted February 8, 2009 what about if a guy has been badly hurt by an ex... could this stop him from getting into a relationship with someone else no matter how much he liked her
spookie Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 what about if a guy has been badly hurt by an ex... could this stop him from getting into a relationship with someone else no matter how much he liked her The thing is, not all men - or women - are the same. The rules may be true for the majority, but when you're talking about someone specific, it's impossible to say.
Author brenda collins Posted February 8, 2009 Author Posted February 8, 2009 true but you can generalise a bit?? so whadya think?
Trialbyfire Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 I see where you're coming from, but I still don't buy it. Dropping other important things in one's life for the relationship might be important on rare circumstances but as an all-encompassing overridding theme it's a recipe for disaster. I know, I lived it. Been there, done that. Bought the t-shirt, wore the sucker threadbare. No need to drop everything. That's where you bought the t-shirt. Everyone prioritizes in life. Otherwise they'd always be incapable of completing one thing, frozen in indecision since everything's a priority. On the otherhand, everyone has to live the life that makes them happy. I don't believe that the way you gain your happiness, should be exactly the way everyone else gains their happiness. I'm just challenging your generalizations about how a "good man" acts and taking the opposite generalized stance. I will restate my perspective. From my experience, the men who've been all in, have prioritized myself and the relationship, first. Without him being that into me, I can't be all that into him.
messiah Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 everyone is different, havent read the book havent seen the movie (dont plan to either) some girls like to be pursued some dont. The important thing is you must find out first what that person likes. If you know that the person likes to be pursued then pursue if they dont then just chill and play it cool. I personally dont like to be persued and i dont like to do much pursuing. Thier are no guides for relationships. We are human beings with brains, you do whatever feels right and use common sense!
OpenBook Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 IMO, the guys who drop everything for a woman in the beginning stages of a relationship, are the ones who are most likely to suddenly do a disappearing act later on. They come on really strong, and then - nothing. ZZZZZzzzzzzzzz [flatline] zzzzzzzzzz.... Either that, or they turn out to be emotional bottomless pits, needy and demanding, wanting to monopolize all your time and energy. When two people are in an exclusive relationship, it's a different story. If the woman makes it too easy for a man to see her all the time, he starts taking her for granted and has no incentive to continue to woo her. I think this happens a lot when people get married, too. One (or both) of them just stops trying. And it all goes downhill from there. So I guess my response to the question "Is he just not that into you?" is, it all depends on how the woman paces the relationship.
Isolde Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 IMO, the guys who drop everything for a woman in the beginning stages of a relationship, are the ones who are most likely to suddenly do a disappearing act later on. They come on really strong, and then - nothing. ZZZZZzzzzzzzzz [flatline] zzzzzzzzzz.... Either that, or they turn out to be emotional bottomless pits, needy and demanding, wanting to monopolize all your time and energy. When two people are in an exclusive relationship, it's a different story. If the woman makes it too easy for a man to see her all the time, he starts taking her for granted and has no incentive to continue to woo her. I think this happens a lot when people get married, too. One (or both) of them just stops trying. And it all goes downhill from there. So I guess my response to the question "Is he just not that into you?" is, it all depends on how the woman paces the relationship. I agree with this. Life is a balancing act. Also, all relationships are different. HJNTIY theory (like the "Rules" theory) is useful only insofar as it tells you whether he's NOT interested. It doesn't predict the success of the R down the line.
Geraltt Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 If the woman makes it too easy for a man to see her all the time, he starts taking her for granted and has no incentive to continue to woo her.I personally think you have to be really careful about this. Expecting a man to chase and chase and chase diminishes both the chaser and the chasee. Sooner or later - usually sooner - the chaser will just get fed up and move on to where there isn't so much chasing and drama. I think this happens a lot when people get married, too. One (or both) of them just stops trying. And it all goes downhill from there.Most often - not always, of course, but it's very common - the woman starts to turn down sex once married and that causes innumerable problems. I can honestly say that every single married man I know - without exception - said that after the honeymoon the frequency of sex dropped right off the scale. It happened in my marriage too. The men were still expected to do all the woo-ing, the flowers, help with the chores, provide emotional support, etc. etc., but when it came to the bedroom, he could expect nada. Mixed expectations, I guess. I wonder about this too: So I guess my response to the question "Is he just not that into you?" is, it all depends on how the woman paces the relationship. This proceeds from a common, but false, assumption: that it's up to the woman to pace the relationship. A healthy relationship isn't controlled by either party. "Pacing" will come naturally in a healthy relationship, and shouldn't need to be controlled. If it is, the relationship isn't healthy.
Star Gazer Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 I've read the book, lived almost all of the scenarios it presents, and saw the movie last night. And I still believe HJNTIY you is a fantastic general rule to follow. A RULE, meant to have exceptions... RARE exceptions. Exceptions no woman should sit around waiting for. Problem with the movie is that it propetuates many a woman's dellusions that she will be the exception to the "rule" - that if he's not calling you, if he's not sleeping with you, if he's married, if..., if..., if..., then HJNTIY. Why? Well, because the guy that blows her off and doesn't call? Turns out he's into her. But 2 weeks later, after she'd moved on. The guy who's married and not sleeping with her? Turns out he's into her enough to still eventually cheat on his wife and sleep with her. But only after she expressed interest in someone else. The guy who wouldn't marry the girl he'd been with for 7 year? Turns out he was so into her that he did want to marry her. But only after she expressed an ultimatum and moved out of their shared home. BUT each man expressed - one in literal terms - that she was his "exception" to the rule. And each man did so only after the gal in question had in fact MOVED on. So either way, it was a win-win for her. She was either (1) going to be able to move on completely, or (2) shock some sense into him. Either way, she didn't sit around pining for him. I saw the movie with my BF, and I have to say, I was so thrilled as I sat there, knowing 150% that I'd never have to open that damn book or wonder if he's "just not that into me." No woman should have to question that within the confines of a healthy relationship. And if you're asking the question, then you probably already know the answer.
OpenBook Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 This proceeds from a common, but false, assumption: that it's up to the woman to pace the relationship. A healthy relationship isn't controlled by either party. "Pacing" will come naturally in a healthy relationship, and shouldn't need to be controlled. If it is, the relationship isn't healthy. Whatever you say, honey.;)
movingonandon Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 IMO, the guys who drop everything for a woman in the beginning stages of a relationship, are the ones who are most likely to suddenly do a disappearing act later on. They come on really strong, and then - nothing. ZZZZZzzzzzzzzz [flatline] zzzzzzzzzz.... Either that, or they turn out to be emotional bottomless pits, needy and demanding, wanting to monopolize all your time and energy. When two people are in an exclusive relationship, it's a different story. If the woman makes it too easy for a man to see her all the time, he starts taking her for granted and has no incentive to continue to woo her. I think this happens a lot when people get married, too. One (or both) of them just stops trying. And it all goes downhill from there. So I guess my response to the question "Is he just not that into you?" is, it all depends on how the woman paces the relationship. That's why you don't get married too much of a gamble I also strongly disagree that a relationship should be #1 priority in a sense that a relatinoship is just a nice, and important, way to improve and live fulfiling life. But putting it on a piedestal and assigning everything else somewhat lesser importance is self-destructive. A relathionship by definition is connecting two adults with independent lives. So, if the relationship is the #1 priority overshadowing everything else, there will be nothing to connect. Basically, there is time and place for everything. Compartmentalizing life is under-rated . As for the op question about commitment - as I said --> the main roadblock for guys to "commit" is that it is just too much of a gamble. There is disbalance in what both parties gain and lose in commitment (i.e. marriage), and only *very rarely* a girl is so awesome to justify taking thie huge risk without much hesitation. Sad, but true.
Star Gazer Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 This proceeds from a common, but false, assumption: that it's up to the woman to pace the relationship. I actually think the common assumption is that the MAN should pace the relationship. I disagree with that assumption, and agree with you that it should be equal and easy.
OpenBook Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 That's why you don't get married too much of a gamble I heartily agree!! :D
blind_otter Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 No woman should have to question that within the confines of a healthy relationship. And if you're asking the question, then you probably already know the answer. Excellent point. If you're asking, you know what the deal is.
Trialbyfire Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 Well, because the guy that blows her off and doesn't call? Turns out he's into her. But 2 weeks later, after she'd moved on. Ahahahahaha...not at you SG but this is so apt! A guy that's only "into" a woman after she's moved on, not putting the effort in while he has a chance, is someone who will always be chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. I think it was Gunny who once stated something like this, as paraphrased: Women invest while in a relationship and men invest at the end of it.
Star Gazer Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 Ahahahahaha...not at you SG but this is so apt! A guy that's only "into" a woman after she's moved on, not putting the effort in while he has a chance, is someone who will always be chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. I agree completely. Oh, and then there's the guy who didn't call for 11 days after the first date. Turns out he's the same guy who ends up cheating on his wife (the same woman he didn't call for 11 days at the beginning) while they remodel their house and discuss the potential for starting a family.
nicki Posted February 9, 2009 Posted February 9, 2009 I read the book, saw the movie, too. I have the same thoughts as you do, Stargazer about the movie. I do think the movie strives to say "Continue on with your life. Don't wait to see if you are the exception. Take some action." At any rate, I tend to think more in terms of "reciprocity." If I call the guy, does he call back? If I walk a foot towards him, does he walk a foot towards me? I don't give more than a guy does, unless we are already in a realtionship and the whole giving more thing is circumstantial, as in an illness or a work crisis. And I don't want a guy who doesn't make me a priority. If he's too busy, or too scared....whatever, that's cool. See ya later!
Ariadne Posted February 9, 2009 Posted February 9, 2009 So a few of you may have read the book and now seen the movie!! what do you all reckon is the only reason why a guy wont commit to you or call you because he is just not that into you or can there be other reasons?? Let me know what you all think... would be good to have a few guys perspectives on this one too! I read the book, and is about guys who are definitely into you. Of course, those guys are very easy to detect. Don't need a book for that.
Recommended Posts