Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 There was just a reason that I didn't ask them out - I wasn't interested but since they asked, I went anyway. Precisely. And nobody wants to date someone as a time filler.
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 I have noticed that this occurs less (less to me, anyway). I don't mean to high-jack the thread so maybe I'll start one on this. I don't know if it's a function of age - women seem to become more guarded based on being burned? Or as I age am I less attractive so I don't generate that reaction as much? Or is it society? I seem to be able to meet European women much easier in this way. Or are we becoming less interactive with people? Questions! I do not know. But I'm with Easy. I think we should blame online dating for that.
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 Wow, I think we are on the same page. We already know ourselves and what we have to offer, so we spend less time trying to impress the people we are dating and more time trying to actually learn and appreciate the person (and have some fun in the process). It's just hard for us to find people who think the same way or have the same approach to dating. So what kind of conditioner do you use?? I think Biolage is the best. Yes. I'm hoping that being a certain way will attract the same. I want a solid guy that gets it, so I do my best to be the sold girl that gets it. I can't believe you just said that. Yes, I do use Biolage regularly. But for deep conditioning (I have long hair to keep up) I use Kerastase. Aaahhhh... But if you have hair like your avatar, why would you be using it?
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 That's very interesting, and I think a lot of that pressure is because of the way dating has sped up nowadays. When you have repeated contact with someone (like at work and school) you actually get to know something about another person before you decide to date them. Now it seems like we have 2 hours to convince the other person that we are perfect, and if we don't, we fail. It puts intense pressure on us. I think that's also why we have so many incidents of people falling for their friends or getting crushes on people that we work with -- we have repeated contact with people in low-pressure situations, so we actually get to know them and then realize that we're attracted to them. That's probably a more normal development process than picking a person out of a catalog (which is what online dating effectively is). I whole heartedly agree. I prefer to get to know someone under every day circumstances. It might weed out the phoneys, and actually keep someone you might have overlooked that was solid. Unfortunately, there are mostly marrieds or 20 somethings at my job so it's slim pickins.
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 It's still difficult to resist being swept off my feet and seeing the insincerity of the guy's tactics. In my opinion, it's the only way to a real relationship. I've yet to experience being swept off my feet by someone who was sincere.
musemaj11 Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 Did it ever occur to u that maybe the problem is with u? Coz obviously a lot of women hve found men who enjoy mutual affection.
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 Since I am not w/in your swatting range I will say that I think this is more of a female point of view. I never think in terms of fears and marketing. I just kind of plow ahead, undaunted so to speak. Not without being considerate of the object of my desires, however. I just am not a guarded person. To quote something I said with my last GF - I just open my heart, dump it out and read what it says. Good? Bad? Who knows... You have more fortitude than I do then. I don't enjoy heart ache much. What's swatting range?
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 I believe men that say they like chasing. I believe women when they say they like being chased. I don't believe this is normal or correct or good. It's not bad either, just wait. If you're good at chasing, you're good at dating. OK, fine. That says nothing about being good at relationships. Many of us hope for close personal intimacy with the opposite sex. The courtship is relatively brief compared to the whole. Why not do what works to get a good relationship? The other problem with one person chasing, is that you have to chase before you know the person. You're chasing because you think you might want a relationship. Why not stop chasing and get to know them? Being good at dating and courtship is fine if you want a lifestyle of dating. Many fine people are awkward at this but are great at relationships. Just my $.02 Good point. But unfortunately, many courtships crash and burn because of these things. So you spend more time dating really, than having actual relationships. So when we all graduate, we get to go to the relationships forum. Is there one on here? Or do people assume there's no work required until they get to the breakup forum? Or is it dating, cheating, then breakup?
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 What exactly is meant by being/playing hard to get? Say, when I call, not take my call intentionally? Or when I ask out for a date, be not available even when you are? Or is it deeper stuff, like not saying how one feels when one feels something for the other? Can any specifics be offered? When I did it I was simply friendly (most of these guys were friends at some point), slightly flirtatious, confident, and very physically aware of their presence (no ogling.) Yet I withdrew if they advanced to try to make something happen. I didn't flake or not take their calls. It usually didn't get to that point. I can't remember what I did, when it did. I do remember doing this to one particular guy who lived across the hall. Good looking tennis instructor. He wanted to give me practically free lessons. I'd flirt and smile and never call him to take him up on the lessons. He got pretty mad and stopped talking to me, he was so insulted. LOL I didn't take it personally though. I think I tried to get a lesson from him later before he showed how mad he was and he ignored me. I thought he was a big baby to be honest.
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 About 3 feet. You calling me short? Or are you saying you're taking the liberty of saying something since I can't swat you?
Jonno_S Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 When I did it I was simply friendly (most of these guys were friends at some point), slightly flirtatious, confident, and very physically aware of their presence (no ogling.) Yet I withdrew if they advanced to try to make something happen. I didn't flake or not take their calls. It usually didn't get to that point. I can't remember what I did, when it did. I do remember doing this to one particular guy who lived across the hall. Good looking tennis instructor. He wanted to give me practically free lessons. I'd flirt and smile and never call him to take him up on the lessons. He got pretty mad and stopped talking to me, he was so insulted. LOL I didn't take it personally though. I think I tried to get a lesson from him later before he showed how mad he was and he ignored me. I thought he was a big baby to be honest. Okay, that makes it more clear. You probably did that guy's ego a good lesson. I would likely never know if a woman were to play HTG avec moi because I pretty much go away as directed. The flirting and smiling would have thrown me off, especially if the female was attractive so maybe a mixed signal thing. I find it more dignified to never have to be told twice. So maybe I was played hard to get with. I remember a girl who knew me from college (I taught ther, she worked there) so she made an appointment to come see me - dressed and perfumed if I remember correctly. Next day a single rose (red?) comes to my office. So I call her and she totally played dumb. Almost like it was absurd that I would think she was interested. And I just remembered a girl who rejected me. Gayle, you bitch! But every, and I mean every time I have seen her since - never with a guy. Always with females...always...hmmmm.
Jonno_S Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 You calling me short? Or are you saying you're taking the liberty of saying something since I can't swat you? I have no idea how tall you are miss, and I would never say anything deserving of a swat.
Jonno_S Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 I've yet to experience being swept off my feet by someone who was sincere. I sense optimism here...
carhill Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 (edited) What exactly is meant by being/playing hard to get?Physically and/or emotionally unavailable, juxtaposed with words and/or actions which might suggest that such availability is possible, would be my simplistic definition. Can any specifics be offered?Some perceptive datapoints from my experience: 1. Difficult to nail down firm plans with. Nearly everything (note 'nearly') is last minute. 2. Reticent about making plans (by 'plans' I mean personal physical interactions, like 'dates'). 'Let me see'. 'I don't know'. 'Well, I'll think about that'. Again, the caveat is 'nearly'. 3.Man - 'How do you feel about that'. Woman -'I don't know. Let me think about it'. 4. Few if any proactive compliments about and/or expressions of appreciation for the man. Reading this thread caused me to reflect on that. Revelations come in mysterious ways. Examples (not being heard) might be 'you're so sweet'. 'wow, that was an amazing accomplishment'. 'You're looking handsome tonight', etc. These are subtle ways (by omission) of minimizing a man without saying or doing anything overtly negative. A more aggressive variation is generally complimenting other males (situationally or by examples) within the same dynamic, especially where the woman has heard/experienced such compliments from the man she's with. 5. Sharing of feelings about experiences and people other than the man one is with. Purposely leaving him out of that equation, like he doesn't exist emotionally to the woman. This is balanced by brief bursts of emotional interest and/or affection, as quickly gone as it arrives. I could go on and on as there have been dozens to hundreds of datapoints to sample, all with varying degrees of this phenomena, ranging from outright game-playing to orbiter insertion. OTOH, and I find this remarkable, there is no 'hard to get' at all when a woman is placing a man into the friendzone. She's wonderfully open, generous and giving, like she would be with a 'family member'. All the mystery, angst, anxiety and anger is saved for her lover. LOL. I remember a great example from last year when dating. In the middle of a what appeared to be a mutually humorous and engaging conversation over dinner, the lady asked 'do you still want to go to the movie?' (which we had planned for afterwards). I of course said 'yes' enthusiastically, not considering making some flirtacious joke, and we did. Interestingly, it was at that movie, after, that we 'ran in' to a couple of her female friends/co-workers. With that dynamic on my mind, when hearing the item #1 in my list the next week, I discontinued with her. I've probably been more vulnerable to hard-to-get women, game-playing women and emotional whores simply because I sought to 'get to know' women I found attractive. They could use that interest to manipulate the dynamic, since it occurs over time. It's an incremental process, with each increment being vulnerable. Now, whenever I get even the smallest sense (watching those increments) that a woman's interest in myself exists primarily in the undefined and ambiguous future, I erase her. No prejudice and no redemption. I live and love in the present. Edited February 6, 2011 by carhill
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 2. Reticent about making plans (by 'plans' I mean personal physical interactions, like 'dates'). 'Let me see'. 'I don't know'. 'Well, I'll think about that'. Again, the caveat is 'nearly'. 3.Man - 'How do you feel about that'. Woman -'I don't know. Let me think about it'. This part is true. I was ambivalent and said this often. I still do on occasion when I am not sure what my interest level is. As for the situation with the movies and the girlfriends, I didn't understand that at all. What was going on here and why did you stop seeing her?
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 Okay, that makes it more clear. You probably did that guy's ego a good lesson. I would likely never know if a woman were to play HTG avec moi because I pretty much go away as directed. The flirting and smiling would have thrown me off, especially if the female was attractive so maybe a mixed signal thing. I find it more dignified to never have to be told twice. So maybe I was played hard to get with. I remember a girl who knew me from college (I taught ther, she worked there) so she made an appointment to come see me - dressed and perfumed if I remember correctly. Next day a single rose (red?) comes to my office. So I call her and she totally played dumb. Almost like it was absurd that I would think she was interested. And I just remembered a girl who rejected me. Gayle, you bitch! But every, and I mean every time I have seen her since - never with a guy. Always with females...always...hmmmm. Well, now that I think about it the first time I saw the guy he was giving another pretty girl in the complex tennis lessons. Didn't want him to think it was going to be that easy with me. pfftt. The rose story is very odd. Come here, go away? Mysterious? I guess if it works but that just doesn't sound like the right way to go about it. Are you saying that Gayle is a lesbian because she's not interested in you? A guy I knew once tried to tell our group of friends this about me where he was promptly ridiculed.
carhill Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 As for the situation with the movies and the girlfriends, I didn't understand that at all. What was going on here and why did you stop seeing her?The combination of questioning instead of being enthusiastic about continuing the date at the theater, the mysterious appearance of the friends at said theater and being 'busy' the next week without clear and genuine interest in scheduling a future date. This was someone I had asked out three times over a month period, so it wasn't 'new'. She was 47 and I was 50 at that time, so we're not kids. I just don't screw around with that stuff anymore. Too many bad datapoints in my past. A person who doesn't learn from their mistakes is destined to be ruled by them. That's it.
Jonno_S Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 Are you saying that Gayle is a lesbian because she's not interested in you? A guy I knew once tried to tell our group of friends this about me where he was promptly ridiculed. She must be - she rejected me. No other explanation is plausible. And I think the rose was yellow, as I recollect. So sure, mixed signals indeed. I would have preferred a giftcard to Starbucks, though, if it was meant to show gratitude.
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 The combination of questioning instead of being enthusiastic about continuing the date at the theater, the mysterious appearance of the friends at said theater and being 'busy' the next week without clear and genuine interest in scheduling a future date. This was someone I had asked out three times over a month period, so it wasn't 'new'. She was 47 and I was 50 at that time, so we're not kids. I just don't screw around with that stuff anymore. Too many bad datapoints in my past. A person who doesn't learn from their mistakes is destined to be ruled by them. That's it. I'm retarded. I failed to scroll up to remember what #1 was. I gotcha. So it sounds like this happened after a few dates. I wonder if it was coincidental though. It's hard to get 2 women out to "rescue" her on such short notice if things aren't going well. Glad you moved on. Your story just confirms my theory about #1. He told me he was going to be busy the next few days, whereas he had always asked me out at the end of the date for the next time. Yet, he still stayed with me for 3 hours and went for the kiss. Talk about mixed signals.
Author daphne Posted February 6, 2011 Author Posted February 6, 2011 She must be - she rejected me. No other explanation is plausible. And I think the rose was yellow, as I recollect. So sure, mixed signals indeed. I would have preferred a giftcard to Starbucks, though, if it was meant to show gratitude. I like your defense mechanisms. You should have sent the other one a note then, to mention the starbucks card for future reference. I will say that everyone does some wacky things in dating when they're younger. It seems to make sense at the time, but looking back I know we'd all be embarrassed to recount our gaffes. That should be its own thread!
Jannah Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 Ah, I can see how since I tried to shorten an already lengthy post that some of the details are left out. Many times these men were in the same social/business circles that pursued me. We were around each other, but I remained just distant enough to avoid dating them. We would be out in social settings together. I basically just tap danced around dating any but was still friendly. It wasn't that I was doing anything to lead them on. It was more that I didn't do anything to dissuade them from pursuing. I didn't make plans with these guys and flake on them or anything like that. I just kept moving, and they moved with me. Yes. I guess what stuck out in your initial post was this statement: I was in control and to be honest, I could tell that the men enjoyed my aloofness. I felt a little sadistic, but it went along with my anger at men for being so fickle. It was a complete aphrodisiac to these men. The term anger, being the key word. Being hard to get because you have no interest in actually dating the particular men you've mentioned, that is understandable. Being hard to get as a means of punishment towards them, :eek:. I am not suggesting that is what you are purposely doing but just something for you to be cognizant of, which it seems like you are, and you are trying to work through it. Heck, it might even attract a few S&M fellas, if that's something of interest to you.
mo mo Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 Yes. I'm hoping that being a certain way will attract the same. I want a solid guy that gets it, so I do my best to be the sold girl that gets it. I can't believe you just said that. Yes, I do use Biolage regularly. But for deep conditioning (I have long hair to keep up) I use Kerastase. Aaahhhh... But if you have hair like your avatar, why would you be using it? (makes googly eyes at daphne) that isn't me in the avatar. My hair is a few inches long on the top of my head *makes googly eyes* hiiiiii
dispatch3d Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 I highly highly doubt there was any intention in her actions to do malice. Almost noone INTENDS to do harm. They sometimes do do harm, when thinking selfishly, and then rationalize afterwards that their behaviour wasn't that bad because x. Carhill, your long post so reminds me of sheldon on big bang theory I found it pretty funny. Haha I'm forever going to read your writing in sheldon-form. You used a word I had to lookup to find the meaning, and "when hearing the item #1 in my list the next week" was incredibly vague. I think you got on a thought-train and just explored. When that happens people can be incredibly hard to follow because they are more voicing their thoughts, but what they voice often won't be the complete thought. So people just get lost. It'll come off like a rant, but different from people who ACTUALLY rant. Some people have one idea, and when they feel it's opposed, they'll act to argue their point. These people aren't thinking or following thought trains (as I coined them! . Anyhow, that was a rant of something I just talked about with a friend of mine. Do you think option 1 is just a reflection that they know consider you more of an option rather than something that's hard to get/must be planned for. Meaning you are moving from novelty to a given. Like oh I wonder if I could go on a date with him to their thinking of meh I could always just go with x guy, he'll show up he always does. I can't remember what exactly I was reading, but steer away from coming to conclusions about their intentions. Quite frankly you will often be off-based, and will frankly guess "intentions" that more closely reflect your view on the world than anything they may or may not be thinking.
Star Gazer Posted February 6, 2011 Posted February 6, 2011 Daphne, I'm following this thread but feel at a loss for the right words. I can relate to what you're experiencing. I know that when I act or am actually indifferent (as opposed to acting aloof), guys have been much more interested, than if I've been genuine and expressed genuine interest (to the point of initiating contact/dates/etc.). It's frustrating. In fact, there's one guy I was pretty much blowing off since before Christmas because I was truly indifferent towards him. But he kept at it, never gave up. I actually found myself intrigued that he didn't write me off, and agreed to a date. Since I've now expressed interest in return, he seems less interested. WTF? I don't get it! She must be - she rejected me. No other explanation is plausible. And I think the rose was yellow, as I recollect. So sure, mixed signals indeed. I would have preferred a giftcard to Starbucks, though, if it was meant to show gratitude. You crack me up!
Recommended Posts