I don't believe LS's dating "rules" work in the real world for most women

[threebyfate]

My thoughts on any form of universal rule for dating. Understanding and accepting yourself, your needs, triggers, etc. In doing so, the model of a perspective partner will form in your mind so you'll immediately reject those who don't fit the loose model within a reasonable length of time unless red flags pop out at the onset. Then, don't even waste your time on the first date or further interactions beyond friendship, if you're so inclined.

 

Beyond that, everything else is subject to the individuals and their interactive dynamics.

[sumdude]

How far do you take political ideology? Myself, it's primarily focused in the work place. The balance is between two individuals who share similar beliefs in dating, relationships and marriage, whatever those might be.

 

Mercy dating or equity dating aren't terribly realistic.

 

My, my the words chosen.. Mercy dating? Wimpy Guy? How about Teflon reality?

 

I've had equal relationship success/failure rates whether I've been the pursued or the pursuer. So in my experience it doesn't matter who instigates. In fact it's nice to be the pursued, gives you slight bit of the upper hand in the beginning of a relationship... now doesn't it ladies? hmmmm?

[threebyfate]

My, my the words chosen.. Mercy dating? Wimpy Guy? How about Teflon reality?

 

I've had equal relationship success/failure rates whether I've been the pursued or the pursuer. So in my experience it doesn't matter who instigates. In fact it's nice to be the pursued, gives you slight bit of the upper hand in the beginning of a relationship... now doesn't it ladies? hmmmm?

I see. So romantic relationships are viewed as power dynamics? There are some but it shouldn't be the primary driver for relationships. Once that happens, consider it sunk.

[sumdude]

I see. So romantic relationships are viewed as power dynamics? There are some but it shouldn't be the primary driver for relationships. Once that happens, consider it sunk.

 

Exactly, so remind me again why it matters who is the pursuer?

[threebyfate]

Exactly, so remind me again why it matters who is the pursuer?

It matters to me because it's visible proof that the man is assertive, rather than passive or worse yet, passive-aggressive.

 

Perhaps some women prefer passive or passive-aggressive men and if that works for them, then great! If it doesn't and they're just settling, that will become an issue which might manifest too late.

[sumdude]

It matters to me because it's visible proof that the man is assertive, rather than passive or worse yet, passive-aggressive.

 

Perhaps some women prefer passive or passive-aggressive men and if that works for them, then great! If it doesn't and they're just settling, that will become an issue which might manifest too late.

 

So by seeing yourself as the prize to be won you put yourself in the position of playing a game of red light-green light with all your potential suitors. Inherently a position of power. Obviously once relationship starts to grow you can't keep playing it.

[threebyfate]

So by seeing yourself as the prize to be won you put yourself in the position of playing a game of red light-green light with all your potential suitors. Inherently a position of power. Obviously once relationship starts to grow you can't keep playing it.

Now you're making stuff up. Seriously.

[Star Gazer]

It matters to me because it's visible proof that the man is assertive, rather than passive or worse yet, passive-aggressive.

Perhaps some women prefer passive or passive-aggressive men and if that works for them, then great! If it doesn't and they're just settling, that will become an issue which might manifest too late.

 

Exactly. It has nothing to do with power plays or being seen as a prize.

 

If a woman wants an assertive man, why should she chase one who's passive?? EXPLAIN THAT, sumdude.

[threebyfate]

Exactly. It has nothing to do with power plays or being seen as a prize.

 

If a woman wants an assertive man, why should she chase one who's passive?? EXPLAIN THAT, sumdude.

Honestly. Why would any woman chase a man who's traits aren't attractive to her?

[sumdude]

1) Always let a guy do all the pursuing at first. He must initiate all/most contact. If he is slow in responding, wishy washy or shows signs of flaking at the beginning, dump.

 

Agree with this one IF you want a more assertive man. These are the kinds of men I'm attracted to, so this style has worked well for me.

 

Even with H., when I had friends invite him to our annual NYE party, he took charge by getting my number immediately from my friend and then set everything up through a direct call to me. We ended up going to both our NYE parties and the rest, well, bore Bump!

 

Had I not gotten my friends to invite him, he already had plans to find out about me from them so the quasi-initiating on my part only sped up the process, instead of defined it.

 

But if you're not looking for an assertive man, then this is a different ballgame, one I'm not familiar with.

 

Puts you in the position of the man having to prove himself to you therefore being seen as more of a prize.

 

 

2) Don't ever enter a casual relationship with a guy because it won't turn into anything more. A relationship that starts as a hookup has no potential.

 

Depends. Was it really initiated as an ONS or was it a first date where hot and heavy took charge? A guy looking for an ONS isn't likely to be in the same frame of mind as a guy who's open to relationship possibilities.

 

Keeps you from being put in a position as appearing to be easy and therefore less valuable as a long term prospect.

 

 

I've seen enough in life to know that interpersonal dynamics and perception of value/self esteem are tied hand in hard. You clearly perceive yourself as very high value and wanted to find a man of equal or greater value as you define it. Therefore you had your own set of virtual hoops and ladders he had to manage before he proved himself to you. Most likely he had his own tests for you but guys play the game in a different way.

 

The whole point of all these rules to to keep your up your perceived value. I've done a bit of research on this stuff, even went as far as to read "Why Men Love Bitches" and other such books. People value things more when they are hard to get. Simply supply and demand and why playing hard to get works for so many. The same reason that a man with a lot of women around him is seen as more valuable.

Edited November 19, 2010 by sumdude

[threebyfate]

Can't change your mind if you're determined to perceive my motives through your own power dynamics lens. It's like you're trapped in this little world.

 

I've told you my perspective. It hasn't failed me yet. How's your perspective working for you?

[sumdude]

My thoughts on any form of universal rule for dating. Understanding and accepting yourself, your needs, triggers, etc. In doing so, the model of a perspective partner will form in your mind so you'll immediately reject those who don't fit the loose model within a reasonable length of time unless red flags pop out at the onset. Then, don't even waste your time on the first date or further interactions beyond friendship, if you're so inclined.

 

Beyond that, everything else is subject to the individuals and their interactive dynamics.

 

So by seeing yourself as the prize to be won you put yourself in the position of playing a game of red light-green light with all your potential suitors. Inherently a position of power. Obviously once relationship starts to grow you can't keep playing it.

 

It matters to me because it's visible proof that the man is assertive, rather than passive or worse yet, passive-aggressive.

 

Puts you in the position of the man having to prove himself to you therefore being seen as more of a prize.

 

Call it power dynamics or just choosing what you think is best for you. Maybe you didn't consciously decide "I'm going to be in the position of power." But by your actions and decisions you put yourself there. Funny thing is we're saying almost the same things here just from different perspectives. It's been a fun debate so far.

[threebyfate]

Can't change your mind if you're determined to perceive my motives through your own power dynamics lens. It's like you're trapped in this little world.

 

I've told you my perspective. It hasn't failed me yet. How's your perspective working for you?

Bump for sumdude.

[WTRanger]

The only real rules brought up in this thread that are any where near applicable to men are:

 

The passive approach does not work.

 

Hanging out does not mean you are dating.

[sumdude]

Bump for sumdude.

 

Hehe, I know what you're getting at. Thought you were better than that TBF. Already forgotten the strange world that is dating ?

 

I don't go through life using this to gain upper hands or what not much. But it is useful to see behind the curtain of human interactions. More of a hobby sort of thing. There are pecking orders that develop. Just like there's a reason you want an aggressive, assertive man.

 

I could take apart and study every part of a flat six engine but I don't really think about it if I'm driving a Porsche though a twisty mountain road.

Edited November 19, 2010 by sumdude

[Star Gazer]

If a woman wants an assertive man, why should she chase one who's passive?? EXPLAIN THAT, sumdude.

 

Sumdude, please answer this question. Please also explain why anyone should chase someone who's personality they find unattractive.

[threebyfate]

Hehe, I know what you're getting at. Thought you were better than that TBF. Already forgotten the strange world that is dating ?

 

I don't go through life using this to gain upper hands or what not much. But it is useful to see behind the curtain of human interactions. More of a hobby sort of thing. There are pecking orders that develop. Just like there's a reason you want an aggressive, assertive man.

 

I could take apart and study every part of a flat six engine but I don't really think about it if I'm driving a Porsche though a twisty mountain road.

sumdude, you're not getting it. There are two people who date. Each one with certain traits, expectations, basically two individuals who are people.

 

IF both people find each other's traits attractive whether these are a combination of traits, the two people will get together. If not, they're not going to mesh.

 

We're not talking about force and object or prize. We're talking about action/reaction. Do you see the distinction?

[NoLongerSad]

Ladies, all that talking makes it difficult to swallow.

[deebeechrisyo]

What exactly is being passive? Not calling/texting enough? Not asking her out on a date? Not getting physical fast enough? Not pursuing her if you know she isn't THAT interested?

[dispatch3d]

Sumdude, please answer this question. Please also explain why anyone should chase someone who's personality they find unattractive.

 

You are acting as if everything is THE GUYS fault. Lol. That's your problem. If you dont' like him by all means stop dating him. Just stop pulling the woe-is-me card everytime he doesn't react in the exact rigid manner you "properly" deserve .

 

You get what I'm saying. Flirting and being forward is ****ing important. If you withdraw and the guy says **** this **** really you are just as much at fault as he is, and it's not a matter of a lack of compatability, its more he doesn't have enough game to realize you just need to be pursued more. Really, guys shouldn't need "game" to date you, they should need personality.

[Els]

You are acting as if everything is THE GUYS fault. Lol. That's your problem. If you dont' like him by all means stop dating him. Just stop pulling the woe-is-me card everytime he doesn't react in the exact rigid manner you "properly" deserve .

 

You get what I'm saying. Flirting and being forward is ****ing important. If you withdraw and the guy says **** this **** really you are just as much at fault as he is, and it's not a matter of a lack of compatability, its more he doesn't have enough game to realize you just need to be pursued more. Really, guys shouldn't need "game" to date you, they should need personality.

 

Frankly, I personally don't believe in the woman letting the man do all the pursuing, but I get what SG and TBF are saying.

 

They, as in the two of them in particular and not all women, are attracted to very assertive and aggressive men. So the hallmark of such a man is one who pursues the lady - that's a no-brainer. It's just like if you wanted a very intelligent man you'd have a good chance finding him in the World Chess Championships, or if you want a man who works out a lot you'd look at his torso.

 

However, I believe it's fallacious to apply such a 'rule' to all men and all women, because the very assertive and aggresive man isn't for everyone. By the way, I don't believe men fall neatly in the categories of aggressive, passive, and passive-aggressive. It's far too fluid a spectrum, with far too many sub-types - it would be wrong to categorize men as such. While I personally dislike passive and passive-aggressive men, I don't really like completely alpha aggressive men either. I like a small degree of reservation in my men - the quiet, subtle sort who makes a discreet move, observes and analyses the response, and then makes another discreet move. It shows thought, calculation and introvertedness (which I love), as opposed to a guy pulling out all the big guns and saying, "**** this, I'm gonna get her even if I have to pop all my guns to do so". The former need encouragement more so than the latter, so on my part I have to keep that up.

 

Again, that's just my preference, and that's the whole point of this ramble: Different approaches for different folks who like different strokes.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Elswyth

[Star Gazer]

You are acting as if everything is THE GUYS fault. Lol. That's your problem.

 

First, no, I'm not. Second, none of your post is responsive to mine.

 

If you dont' like him by all means stop dating him.

 

Uh, duh. That's exactly what I'm saying. If his personality is not one I want, why would I date him, let alone chase after him??

 

Just stop pulling the woe-is-me card everytime he doesn't react in the exact rigid manner you "properly" deserve .

 

I don't need to pull a woe-is-me card. My plan works for me. Every. Single. Time. I'm not a woe-is-me person. I'm not a damsel in distress. Not am I rigid. I apply my standards to the men I date. I realize many men won't meet my standards, including passive pansies.

 

You get what I'm saying. Flirting and being forward is ****ing important. If you withdraw and the guy says **** this **** really you are just as much at fault as he is, and it's not a matter of a lack of compatability, its more he doesn't have enough game to realize you just need to be pursued more. Really, guys shouldn't need "game" to date you, they should need personality.

 

There is no "fault" here. WTF are YOU making this about "fault"? I'm simply applying standards to locate compatible men. I like assertive men, and look for assertive personality traits. It's not a passive man's "fault" that I'm not attracted to him, but it absolutely is a matter of compatibility.

 

And I don't know WTF you're talking about "game." I don't do games.

[OceanGirl]

I wonder what everyone's definition of a passive man is and how to recognize one in the early dating stages.

 

All men that I still considered passive have called/texted asking for dates. However, some didn't have specific plans and I had to come up with ideas on what to do most of the time (they would just call up and say want to catch up on Sat? for example). Then also subtle things like I would have to move things along from one venue to another or they would just sit there forever.

 

Then there is also pursuing if I did something that could be considered iffy. Say I cancel because I am sick. The guy doesn't ring again and waits for me to contact him. Is that passive? Then there are guys who pursue even if you have indirectly blown them off multiple times. Are they assertive or just stalkerish?

 

It's confusing...

[dispatch3d]

First, no, I'm not. Second, none of your post is responsive to mine.

 

 

 

Uh, duh. That's exactly what I'm saying. If his personality is not one I want, why would I date him, let alone chase after him??

 

 

 

I don't need to pull a woe-is-me card. My plan works for me. Every. Single. Time. I'm not a woe-is-me person. I'm not a damsel in distress. Not am I rigid. I apply my standards to the men I date. I realize many men won't meet my standards, including passive pansies.

 

 

 

There is no "fault" here. WTF are YOU making this about "fault"? I'm simply applying standards to locate compatible men. I like assertive men, and look for assertive personality traits. It's not a passive man's "fault" that I'm not attracted to him, but it absolutely is a matter of compatibility.

 

And I don't know WTF you're talking about "game." I don't do games.

 

Ah I see. So when things don't work out with you and a guy it's because they weren't assertive enough. Nevermind, I take back saying you always blame the guy. You are just into assertive guys, and those guys clearly aren't assertive. Right, gotchya. Not anything you did. Not your fault. And you aren't blaming them by saying they just aren't assertive enough. I can see how you are taking some accountability here.

[harmfulsweetz]

See, I've missed out on some really good, quality guys because I didn't make my interest known or clear. Maybe the guy fit into the passive category, but I actually believe he just didn't want to look like a fool for making a move on a girl he didn't know was interested. When I was very interested. I tried the playing it cool, sitting back and letting him do the chase, he didn't. I found out later through friends that he really liked me but wasn't sure of my interest levels, and so he ended up dating someone else. I ended up really regretting not making a move on him considering how obvious he made it that he liked me (kissing my forehead, cuddling me, talking only to me in a big group, offering me his jacket because I was cold etc) and I vow, that I won't make the same mistake, even if the guy ends up labelled as 'passive'.

 

We could be all day discussing the actions of a passive/assertive man but it all boils down to interest levels. There is no written rule that says men must always chase/pursue the woman, or he is a passive pansie! People should do what works for them, and not strive to put labels on every single action someone does/doesn't do.

 

The next time I meet a really great, quality guy, one that I spark with and connect with, I'm not going to worry about who does the approach and makes the move. I'm just going to do it because quite frankly, the rules don't always work for me. And I want an assertive man, but I feel a guy that lays back and doesn't do ANY chasing/pursuing signifies more a level of no interest than his being passive.