|
|
|
|
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/2/2008 10:27:14 PM | | in 2008 no we dont,we are all to busy for all the chasing and stuff.Things need to be easy and not complicated, or at least for me anyway | |
|
| |
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/3/2008 4:41:12 AM | | ladies . do you think playing hard to get will net you a catch ? no . maybe for one night but , that all . we want the woman to be open and tell us what she wants . we have too much to do . work , freinds , ect an ect . | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/3/2008 5:15:06 AM | | A perfect recipe to push me away. I will sleep with a woman when the time is right. Omce your a little older and wiser and understand the consequences of sex, you definatly come to understand that jumping into bed for the sake of doing so can have terrible results. Stalkers, confusion,expectations, yuck, enough to make me wait. | |
|
| |
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:18:24 PM | | Most women I knew that were hard to get were into anal sex. They wanted to make sure they got the largest member before committing to one man | |
|
| |
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/3/2008 5:06:41 PM | Well lets see here. How bout we look at the EVIDENCE rather than talkin' smack?
I've been single TEN YEAH COUNT EM TEN YEARS. I have a career, buying my own home, own my vehicle....and all the magazines come in MY name. I think that pretty much gets rid of the needy, clingy crap.
Does that make me hard to get? Hm. Possibly. But not due to any GAMES. Just don't feel like signing my inheritence over to anyone any time soon.
Try me in four years.
Now...back to that gun lesson........... | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/3/2008 7:25:43 PM |
If men liked women who are ``hard to get,'' they wouldn't pay escorts $300+/hour for a sure thing.[\quote]  Yeah, but that's different -- I don't think the author means 'hard to get' necessarily sexually, but 'hard to get' in that you aren't waiting by the phone, not willing to change plans to be with him, basically having a life -- and seeing if this makes him want to get serious. Sigh...it is all so much work, I agree. Can't we just be ourselves? Oh, wait... | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/4/2008 1:22:30 AM | I've read that book. And 'The Rules', which is basically the same thing.
It all boils down to faking 'high value' by being difficult (but not impossible) to get hold of, spend time with, and so forth. The idea being that if you convince a guy you have 'value', then he'll appreciate you more and try harder to keep you around. It plays into people's natural desire to want what they can't have.
It's actually pretty close to a female version of David DeAngelo's 'Double Your Dating' eBook. Not surprising, considering it's one of his products too. I'm pretty sure 'Christian Carter' is an entirely made up entity....
Anyway, I'm getting off the point. This stuff might well work on a lot of people - and lets face it, the psychological principals behind most of it are sound - but the problem is, it teaches you neither how to tell if someone is really worth 'catching', nor whether *your* perfect match will react positively to it at all, as not all people will.
And if you do catch someone, then what? Stop playing games and see how long it is before they realise the 'chase' is over and there's nothing else they want you for? Or keep the charade up for the rest of your life?
The book is full of fairly accurate generalisations, but the thing about generalisations is that they are absolutely useless to you unless you know when to apply them and when not to.
For example: "If a woman sleeps with a guy too soon, he's likely to have less respect for her"
More often than not that is true. What would you say... maybe 60 or 75% of guys would lose respect for a girl who puts out on the first date, and then not consider her girlfriend material? It's probably higher than that.
But it's only maybe 5% of guys you're really interested in in the first place. What if ALL of those 5% are in the 25-30% of guys who have no problem sleeping with a girl early on and getting into a relationship with her?
Then suddenly it doesn't matter at all if you do it 'too soon'.
When you read any rule in a book like this, you need to ask yourself a question. It's not "Would a guy really think this way?", but "Would the kind of man I really want in my life react this way?"
I can only speak for myself, but the girls I tend to like the best are the ones who break pretty much all the rules in these books. Food for thought. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/4/2008 1:55:40 AM | Humm....You know, this is a very old expression, but I think that's because it's been true for such a long time:
Why buy the cow when the milk is free?
Just think about this biologically (because ignoring biology and pretending we are socially constructed automatons has been thoroughly disproven by modern American society): for men to maximize their reproductive success, they need to impregnate as many women as possible. Since a woman has a 9 month gestation period, it's much more efficient to impregnate several women a few times each than one woman many times. Of course, not raising your offspring carries the risk that none of them will survive. So where do you draw the line?
Obviously, different people draw the line at different places. I hardly believe that Bill Gates hits the club circuit and beds hundreds of women a year, even though his money alone would make that a trivial task. Instead, Bill's strategy is to focus all his energy on ensuring that a few specific offspring succeed, with virtual certainty (as certain as you can be with a $60 billion net worth). Whereas, the bed-hopping pool boy probably has 5 or 6 kids that he doesn't even know about. They might all end up on the street or dead before they hit puberty, but sheer numbers gives him good odds of making at least one that survives into adulthood. Immortality.
If men were guaranteed that the chances of their children's success were directly proportional to the work they put into raising them, then there would be a strong incentive for men to be monogamous and faithful. Obviously, simple observation tells us this is not the case. So who's fault is it? Are men just sleazy pigs? Oddly enough, *men are not to blame*!!! The problem with the "guarantee" posited above is not that men are unsure how their income correlates to their children's success. The problem is that they are *unsure who their children are*. Or, to put it more accurately, they are *unsure who their children's father is*. A recent study shows that up to 20% of men in industrialized societies (read: US & UK) are cuckolds (men raising another man's child unwittingly).
Men know that this is true (the knowledge is in their genes by now), which is why many of them do not invest 100% of their energy in a single family. Sowing your wild oats is nothing more than diversifying the risk *created by women*. Think of it from the woman's perspective. Women don't want to marry aggressive, testosterone-charged construction worker-models who will leave them at the drop of a hat...they want to marry short, bald, pudgy accountants with fat wallets who can provide for their children. But they want those children to be sired by the construction workers/pool boys! That means the rational strategy for everyone is to cheat.
Now, it might not make sense for people well past their child-bearing years to engage in this reproductive-weighted social calculus, which is clearly inapplicable at this stage of the game. However, our brains aren't wired to engage in rational long-term behavior beyond child-rearing. So whatever behavior worked at 20 works just fine at 60...why change a good thing? Which means that those hunky guys you love to have chasing you are still running on a program optimized for a man young enough to be his son/grandson.
It also means that giving him the thrill of the chase might be fun for you, and might be fun for him, but is completely ineffective at turning him into a "keeper". If you want a man long-term, it doesn't matter if he says "LTR", "Quickie", or "Martian" in his profile; if you find him sexy and exciting, so do a million other women, and he knows that. Putting "LTR" there is just a shiny bauble on the hook to reel you in for the catch-n-release. Sure, you can prolly compete with a handful of other women for his attention (and obviously, you have), but can you compete with *all* of them? Let's be realistic...nobody can. I mean c'mon...Elizabeth "The Hottie" Hurley couldn't even keep Hugh Grant away from a skanky ho!!! If Liz Hurley can't keep her man, how on earth can you expect to?!?
If you seriously want an LTR, if you want a man who will settle, it is *you* who has to settle, and pick a man *you can keep*. Games are optional and completely irrelevant to your ultimate success (except that keepers are much less tolerant of games than sleepers). And here's another oldie-but-goodie, for free, even! "Those who can, do; those who can't, teach." When it comes to self-help/relationship authors, caveat emptor! | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/4/2008 3:08:51 AM | | Its a turn off to be chased by needy, clingy women who desperately throw themselves on you however its as much of a turn off to have a women play games and act coy in order for us men to chase after them becuz its just as clingy just in a different approach. Its only that the later is more enigmatic and forces us to pursue in order to find out more. With the former you've put all your cards on the table and theres nothing left to interest us. Sleeping with someone doesnt change how someone feels about another it just complicates them. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/4/2008 3:44:16 AM | | I gotta say, I'm less likely to want to get serious with a woman that seems to have enough going on in her life that she doesn't have room/need me in it seemingly. I know 1 woman, she seems nice and interesting, I'd try and get myself in there somehow but she's so busy all the time with every other person she knows, not to mention half a dozen other things that I pretty much gave up on having any chance at really getting enough time with her in the long run to even feel like I was actually dating her. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/4/2008 8:03:19 AM | If a woman plays the game of "playing the field" or acting distant then she'll definitely become distant from me... by MY choice.
There are too many fish in the sea and too little time on this earth to waste it while she figures out what she wants. Someone who truly has their sh!t together will know whether I'm possibly the right one for her within 1 or 2 dates.
Now calling every 5 minutes is too much as well but once again, someone who's got "it" together won't do that either.
You've got to be able to recognize the situation and recognize whether you've got the luxury of deciding how fast or slow things are going to go at that moment. In a healthy situation, both parties will at times be in a position to determine the pace of things.
I wouldn't place too much faith in a book on relationships since they are almost always written from a singular point of view and the operative portion of the word singular is "single". | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/4/2008 8:28:54 AM | well me, im only 22 but i consider myself pretty sensible.
to the op, im kinda shy initially but i warm up in short time, but i dont really pursue women, at least not if i just see them on the street, and if i did i wouldnt go for the hard to get types. to me their playing games, being available doesnt make u easy, the chase might be exciting, but if u like the guy too, why are u playing games? and i wouldnt be comfortable with a girl whos "playing the field", everyone would like to feel special with the mate their dating, and to say "how will i know whos right for me", ull never find that person if u cant focus on one person... if i know that ur playing the feild im not gonna devote my all into the strength and progress of the relationship because i know i'm not the only guy ur spending time of interest in. so u would lose out, and never know it.btw having sex with a girl quick once i meet her within 3 to 4 dates wouldnt make me loose respect for her, if she wants it and i want it it wouldnt have anything to do with building a relationship with her.i dont place a high value on sex.show interest but give him space too, n dont call him everyday | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/4/2008 9:08:24 AM |
if a woman sleeps with you early on in a relationship, is it possible for you to develop real feelings for her, or is she always going to be a f*ck buddy in your minds?
Why would it not be possible?
It depends if I really like her, she likes me and we are compatible. I have had quite a few LTRs where we basically just met and had unbridled passion from the beginning. To me that is ideal.
Wanting to wait is ok, but she has to reciprocate interest. And if I find out she is dating other guys. That's not good. I am the Boss. She is either my woman or she is not. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/4/2008 9:20:03 AM | | What a joke. If someone is playing hard to get then there is nothing to get. If the chemistry is right there is no need to play games. Its a childish act which makes the point to me that this person has issues above an beyond anything I would be willing to deal with...next. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 3/4/2008 10:03:07 AM | To me, there are two types of "hard to get" women.
First, there's the type that respects herself and wants to get to know me, respectfully, before jumping in my bed. When she does decide to have sex, there's a lot more meaning to it and I end up feeling closer to her. This is my dream girl! =) ...nothing would ever work better to keep me than this type of woman.
The second type is the woman that's all, "Me, Me, Me... and more ME!" This type of woman seems like she has some sort of vedetta towards me right from the get-go. And when we do actually have sex, it's like *I'm* the lucky one. In bed, they're all, "Me, me, me" too... and I wonder if it (the me, me, me attitude) will ever END!! It's funny to see if this type of "hard to get" woman will make it out the door with my BOOT stuck in her BUTT! lol. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 2/21/2009 7:48:31 PM | | I don't like games at all. Hard to get women AND/OR younger women tend to be a turn off. Life's too short and the earth has far too many wonders to waste time chasing in 'the game'. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 2/21/2009 8:59:54 PM | | No. When someone plays "hard to get" I assume that they aren't interested and move on to someone that'll appear to take me seriously. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 2/21/2009 10:14:48 PM |
There's a really nice middle ground where women are self-confident and honest.
I think this sums it up pretty well. I don't think anybody likes playing games when it comes to affairs of the heart. Some people get an ego boost from knowing they're attractive and desirable, but when others see this, its a total turn off. I do agree with the part about not having sex until you feel like you know the person somewhat. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 2/21/2009 10:16:59 PM | First, and most importantly, people are different; what works for one will be a total turn off for another. The "game" bull$hit, ANY game bull$hit, is a total turn off for me. If he calls, and you're free, then be free; if you are busy, say so. Therte is a HUGE difference between "being available" and being "clingy and demanding". There is also a huge difference between being busy, and playing a game. I don't do games.
Are there guys out there who would never resepect you as "girlfriend material" if you slept with them on a first date? Absolutely. Maybe they are the ones who are into women who play games. The good news is that they, and I, would not be interested in the same women anyway. Are there guys out there who could sleep with you on a first date, marry you, and stay happily married for 40 years? Absolutely.
The trick to it all, is the same across the board...stay true to yourself. If you are the type who needs to date someone for a long time before you sleep with them; then don't change. That's you, and you need to find someone who is into the REAL you, not someone who's following fake rules in a book. If you are someone who is comfortable being sexual fairly early in a relationship; then don't change. If the guy is turned off by that, you probably wouldn't have been a goodmatch anyway. Again, he needs to know the real you; and you deserve someone who can appreciate who YOU are.
Personally, I think sexual compatability is way too important to vest too much of myself in a relationship only to find out, months into it, that we are sexually incompatible. Does that mean that I would not be willing to have a relationship with the type of woman who plays the type of games your book condones? Yes is does; but I'm good with that. They may be phenominal women, and I sincerely hope they find someone who will worship the ground they walk on; I really do; it just won't be me.
On the flip side, I am NOT, in ANY WAY, advocating USING sex as a way to attract someone. That's as bad, if not worse, than PLAYING something you aren't.
Bottom line, if you want to find someone who is into YOU, you have to be real. Women who would be truly successful following the rules in that book, are already doing it anyway. Whatever it is that you do, and whoever it is that you are, DON'T CHANGE in order to please, or attract, someone else! | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 2/21/2009 10:27:00 PM | | If I care for a woman. I dont like them playing hard to get as a game. If I really care about someone how soon we have sex has no bearing on my feelings for her. | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 2/21/2009 11:12:49 PM |
I totally get and understand everything this author states, but the last bit sticks in my craw a bit...so guys, tell me -- if a woman sleeps with you early on in a relationship, is it possible for you to develop real feelings for her, or is she always going to be a f*ck buddy in your minds?
I really want to know what guys think about this...
Whoa someone really dug into the archives for this thread!!
The reason it sticks in your craw is because it really *is* possible for a man who knows himself and what he wants to develop feelings even if you slept with him early in the relationship. Even if it was the first or second date. In fact, I'd have to say that all of the long termers I've had did not make me wait long if they made me wait at all. I already knew them and that I wanted them too. I don't play along with the waiting game because it can easily be turned around into an emotional rape situation. Emotional rape is no joke, look it up.
While I'm *waiting* I'm still developing feelings for a person. They are getting stronger and stronger. The one time I got played by a woman, she played a game on me, then she claimed never to have even been attracted to me at all. I developed very deep emotions for her and that really seriously hurt me. I'm much more careful now. I have to establish the sexual and physical connection early, before my feelings go overboard. I'm mature enough to know pretty quickly if I want her and will stay with her. I don't need to be played with. I consider such games to be very childish and immature.
I'm surprised by these kinds of (so-called) *self help* books for women or couples written by MEN. I mean Mars and Venus is another series of ideolical fairy tales too. Where the f_ck are all these female idolizing - p_ssywhipped self hating masochistic d_ckless male nancy-boy authors coming from? These kinds of books are supposed to *help* relationships?!? HOLY GOD!!!! $%#%@!%^&$%#!!!!!!!
Mike | |
|
| Do men really like 'hard to get' women?
Posted: 2/22/2009 5:23:42 AM | sound pretty sick and immature to me, i m opposed to any 'game playing', a woman keeping her potential mate in a state of frustration,....while serial dating, is just after what she considers the best catch,(materialistic gold digger comes to mind)i would have more respect for a prostitute, or a religious fanatic then a woman, hat plays these games,generally i am not one to judge but this would be the number one red flag for me
i have seen relationships like this before, woman plays the field, gets man who has money but no self esteem, she ends up feeling like a she is owned,he gets bored, the end.... | |
|
|
| Page 3 of 5
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
|
Home
login 
