He wants to be "friends" but still likes me? Did I kill the attraction?

September 27, 2008 2:23 PM

He likes me.. says I'm cute, smart and does want to be intimate.. but doesn't want a relationship. What is wrong?

I'm 30 from Ca., he's 36 originally from the UK now also in Ca. We dated intensely for 4 weeks, had an amazing time and connected very well - physically and mentally. He's even introduced me to his friends. But after having a few beers, we got intimate (did not go all the way, I did tell him I can't sleep w/ someone until I got a commitment.. maybe that was a bad idea) and a week later, he broke up with me, asking to be friends saying he didn't "feel it."

I refused to talk to him for 3 wks. After a while, I gave in as a test and he was happy to hear from me. So now we're building as "friends". But the weird thing is, he still cares for me, and has said that I'm smart, cute, everything he is looking for. We hung out at a museum last week and he never left my side, he kept looking at me and I still felt that spark. Recently he admitted that he still thought of me, even sexually but he doesn't know if he sees us long term. I don't understand?

Do other men on here understand what's going on? I'm totally lost. I thought maybe the attraction died, but apparently it hasn't? Or did it? Did I initially scare him off? We plan on talking about things this week, as I want to make this work, but I don't want to be put in a compromising position.

Thank you.

posted by freshsprout to human relations (38 comments total)

btw... I should add that I want to make "this work" means - just keeping lines of communication open, or loosely dating per se, I guess.
posted by freshsprout at 2:25 PM on September 27, 2008

I guess I don't understand what's not to understand.

You told him you don't want to have sex without a commitment. He told you he doesn't want to commit. What's the confusion?
posted by Flunkie at 2:33 PM on September 27, 2008 [2 favorites]

he admitted that he still thought of me, even sexually but he doesn't know if he sees us long term. I don't understand?

He "admitted" - you make it sound like some sort of heart felt confession.

I don't see anything that complex or confusing here. He is attracted to you on several levels, but that doesn't mean he wants to be exclusive with you. It sounds like he has tried to make that clear to you, so I don't sense any type of manipulation on his part.

It sounds like you're looking for a committed relationship and this guy isn't. Don't over it think it - he has made his intentions clear: he wants someone to hang out with, have sex with, maybe do some other activities, but not commit to. You want all that with the commitment.

Did you scare him away initially? Who knows? Who cares? The fact is you've reconnected, but nothing has changed - you still want the exclusive relationship, and he just wants to screw your brains out.

You need to quit fooling yourself about his intentions - he's been clear with what he wants, don't think you can fool him into dating you. Yes, it may lead to that, but if go into this relationships telling yourself, maybe, just maybe he'll become your boyfriend, then you're probably setting yourself up for disappointment.

If you enjoy the attention, the sex, and can handle the lack of commitment - go for it. However, I'm betting you can't handle that, so in this case you should resolve to just be friends with no benefits, and keep looking for someone who actually wants to be your boyfriend.
posted by wfrgms at 2:39 PM on September 27, 2008 [6 favorites]

I agree with Flunkie.

He broke up with you because he didn't want a commitment and you did. When he said he didn't "feel it" he either meant he didn't feel he could be in a committed relationship or he was just lying to save you both some trouble.

You're not building "as friends". He's hoping you might have changed you mind about "no intimacy without a relationship".

What exactly do you want to make work? Loose dating and communication lines? You broke off the communication after he broke up with you. (and it seems he broke up with you because of the intimacy thing)


It's up to you really. Do you want to change your stance on the commitment issue? If you don't, then you need to break up with him because he still sees you as more than just a friend and from the sounds of it, he still doesn't want the commitment.
posted by abdulf at 2:43 PM on September 27, 2008

You mention that he's originally from a different country than you...maybe it wouldn't hurt to make sure you're both on the same page with regards to what "commitment" means. I've informally heard about different dating styles for the UK & US.
posted by PY at 2:52 PM on September 27, 2008 [1 favorite]

Yes, I get what you guys are saying.. and know ultimately it's what I want.. if I want something that is a relationship w/ no commitment.

I was led to believe he started out looking for commitment (we met via an online dating site), so I was confused after we were intimate. But what I want to know - for a guy... was I pushing too much too soon? (a few friends said I should've never said commitment in a bedroom) Is there any cultural differences between US and UK dating and sleeping together?

My British and German friends say it's different over there, no one really confirms you're in a "committed" relation.. you just hang out. Or maybe I'm splitting hairs... thanks.
posted by freshsprout at 2:53 PM on September 27, 2008

Unfortunately, you're probably more likely to change what you want (no sex without commitment) than he is to change what he wants (not getting into a commitment). If that sounds like something you don't want to fall in to, don't want to be the one to 'give in' then walk away.

Also, big chance that if he sees you distancing yourself or is worried that the only way he'll get to have you in his life is to commit, he'll want to make the commitment. That's happened to me before, lasted for 1.5 years. But don't do things with the hope of that.
posted by KateHasQuestions at 2:56 PM on September 27, 2008 [1 favorite]

"Committment" was probably a bad choice of words given the stigma it carries for men (I am a man), who sometimes perceive it as the sort of thing bridezillas and psycho exes talk about it. Without a thorough sense of the context there, I think you could have conveyed to him what you wanted him to know without putting him off by saying something like "I'd like to know you better and spend more time with you before we have sex". If, after that, he had broken it off anyway, then you know that he's completely uninterested in anything other than sex and can write him off accordingly. As an aside, I think your thing with this guy is dead in the water. Anything that requires that much fumbling explanation from both parties aftter just 4 weeks probably isn't worth the effort.
posted by Inspector.Gadget at 2:59 PM on September 27, 2008 [1 favorite]

Well, I'd have thought your planned talk would tell you a lot more than Ask Mefi will be able to, but I guess we can give it a stab.

You seem to have singled out the not sleeping with someone without a commitment - are you and he on the same page about what that meant? That is, if he interpreted it to mean "no sex before marriage" that immediately brings up the idea of you getting married, which at four weeks into your relationship probably wasn't something he had thought about much.

So, yeah, as PY suggests you probably want to make sure he received the message you were trying to send.
posted by Mike1024 at 3:01 PM on September 27, 2008 [1 favorite]

But what I want to know - for a guy... was I pushing too much too soon? (a few friends said I should've never said commitment in a bedroom) Is there any cultural differences between US and UK dating and sleeping together?


+1 Inspector.Gadget

I do think that you should have made your stance clear about sex before you were in the bedroom, so he knew up front that it was going to stop at a certain point.

What does 'a commitment' mean to you? A monogamous relationship? Something else? In the bedroom is not the time to have to define what you mean. Did you in fact define to him what 'commitment' meant? Can you tell us, so we know what you meant?

That being said, there's nothing here to make work. He's not interested in whatever commitment you're asking for. I'm assuming your desire hasn't changed. Whether he's attracted to you has zero to do with this - he's hoping you'll change your mind.

If you haven't changed yours, you should either walk away or make it clear that your stance hasn't changed.

After a while, I gave in as a test and he was happy to hear from me.

As a test? I'll be blunt - you're too old to be playing these games. What exactly was this test supposed to tell you? Just because he's happy to hear from you doesn't mean he's changed his mind. When someone tells you something about themself - take them at their word. Namely, don't go any further with this guy, expecting him to give you whatever he wasn't interested in doing the first time.
posted by canine epigram at 3:19 PM on September 27, 2008 [5 favorites]

I was led to believe he started out looking for commitment (we met via an online dating site)

I think this has something to do with the way women (and men) act in the online dating world. Those sites encourage you to put it all out there: "LOOKING FOR SERIOUS RELATIONSHIP ONLY!!11!one" No one throws that out on first meeting in real life; you'd look insane. People just kind of get to know each other and figure it out.

So guys filling out those profiles are kind of backed into a corner- they don't want to lie, but how many dates are they going to get if they check the "CASUAL SEX AND THEN FUCK OFF PLEASE" box? It might not be that they NEVER want a relationship, but maybe only under very specific circumstances. In real life you don't have to broadcast your "goal" before you even meet the person you're dating. So they try to dance around the issue. I suspect this is what happened here.
posted by drjimmy11 at 3:25 PM on September 27, 2008 [4 favorites]

I was led to believe he started out looking for commitment (we met via an online dating site)

What did it say on the site? "Relationship", "long-term relationship", and "commitment" mean very different things to different people. Example:

You could think of all three as meaning the same thing; a monogamous relationship with marriage as a goal.

He could think of "relationship" as casual dating, "long-term relationship" as a long-lasting monogamous relationship with no specific goal of marriage, and "commitment" as a long-term relationship with marriage as a goal.
posted by CKmtl at 3:30 PM on September 27, 2008 [2 favorites]

He's just not that into you
posted by Texasjake987 at 3:39 PM on September 27, 2008 [3 favorites]

The impression I get from reading this is that when you say commitment, what you meant is an exclusive relationship. In other words, that you want the two of you to only date each other, but you're not talking about marriage or anything necessarily. Is that what you mean?

If so, did you use the word "commitment" and not clarify exactly what you meant by that? Because I could see how a guy could take that to mean you wanted a really, really serious relationship and not just a "lets not see other people" relationship. Is it possible that's what happened?

If you made all that clear, then I'm with Flunkie. I know it seems weird that he would seem to like you a lot and not want an exclusive relationship, but some people are just that way.
posted by Nattie at 4:04 PM on September 27, 2008 [1 favorite]

A different take here, speaking from my own perspective as a guy.

He stopped seeing you because he didn't want to commit to someone he hadn't had sex with yet.

I wouldn't either. It's not a fear of commitment. It's a fear of commitment before you know what you're getting yourself into.

If you want him back, tell him that you rushed the commitment thing, and that you want to keep seeing him, including sleeping with him, and see how it goes. Let him know that, yes, you are looking for a boyfriend in the long term, but you understand that you were asking for too much too fast.
posted by bingo at 4:35 PM on September 27, 2008 [8 favorites]

I would have walked away from a "commitment before sex" situation as well. In fact, I would walk away from a commitment after sex situation also, if it came too soon. Don't jump the gun. How am I supposed to "commit" to someone I barely know, even if we have had sex?
posted by zhivota at 4:44 PM on September 27, 2008 [1 favorite]

Don't listen to bingo. Don't sleep with this guy in the hope he'll commit afterward, because he won't. You can tell from some fooling around whether you have chemistry or not. This guy has decided it's not going to work for him for whatever reason (haven't you ever met someone with lots of great qualities, and yet it wasn't quite there for you?).

I don't mean to be bleak here, but I don't see this going anywhere good. Don't go on trying to be friends with this man, because you won't be satisfied with that. Let it go and keep looking for someone who is eager to be your boyfriend.
posted by orange swan at 4:45 PM on September 27, 2008 [2 favorites]

I once was in a situation similar to this with a 36 yr old British dude living in LA. I would say take a look at his life outside of you-- does he have trouble committing to life projects, a career, goals for himself? Does he have deep connections with his friends, or only a collection of acquaintances? Is he a perpetual PhD student, or the kind of guy who hasn't been able to be in/stay in a relationship since he was in High School, etc? The guy I briefly dated was a total flake in all areas of his life, relationships included. It was naive of me to think I would be any exception, and in the long run I am so relieved I didn't waste any more time and effort on the guy, charming as he was. My advice: it isn't worth your time to try and stick it out or convince him to change-- you can do better.
posted by np312 at 5:04 PM on September 27, 2008 [3 favorites]

As a guy, I'd probably be a bit twitchy about a 30yo talking "commitment" after four weeks, because it would conjure up spectres of body clocks & bridezillas.

If it means "not seeing other people" then fine, but as zhivota & bingo said, if it's interpreted as some kind of long-term, view-to-marriage contractual commitment, then sorry, it'd be far too early to know if that was viable. Especially without having found out yet if there's any chemistry in bed.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:11 PM on September 27, 2008 [2 favorites]

Is there any cultural differences between US and UK dating and sleeping together?

My British and German friends say it's different over there, no one really confirms you're in a "committed" relation.. you just hang out.

The internet is changing all this, but I think it's fair to say there is a definite transatlantic gap in understanding, as well as in practice.

I'm a 40 year old British male and it is only in the last couple of years that I have done anything that would likely be recognizable as dating from an American viewpoint, and I don't consider myself atypical in this.

Stereotypically Brits get drunk and get off (=make out/sleep with) each other then carry on from there. It's a stereotype but it contains a lot of truth and (minus the drink, sometimes) pretty much describes how most of my relationships started for most of my life. The point to take away is that we often see our relationships as starting with an act of intimacy. There is not always much preamble so there is an implicit monogamy, and this holds true even if relationships start differently. When I talk someone about going out with someone (which would be the equivalent term to dating) I assume some sort of relationship. (Incidentally in pre-internet days the notion that Americans dated more than one person simultaneously reached my social circle like a scandalous rumor as we had difficulty interpreting it other than meaning people were sleeping with multiple people behind each others backs).

So all this is a long winded way of saying when I hear commitment I think of (intent to) live together, marry have children etc not monogamy. If I'm intimate with someone, and its ongoing in anyway, that's assumed by default. Commitment is something I would expect talk about *much* later when I was in a reasonable position to make a decision about those things.

So it is entirely possible that when you said commit you were hearing very different things.

But its also possible that he decided it wasn't going to work out for other reasons entirely, and he doesn't want to lead you on. If it were me, and I met a cute smart woman who I really hit it off with, and almost slept with, but decided it wasn't going to work out in that way, I'd shrug my shoulders and carry on being friends, with maybe just the occasional wistful sigh for a while, for what might have been.

But that's me, not him, and he could be like me or as others have suggested, he might just be stringing you along to try and get in your pants panties.

What there isn't, unfortunately, is some subtle super secret guy code that we can crack. Too often, I think, people make the mistake of thinking that if they don't understand what's going on that somehow the other person must do. I suspect its more logical to assume that they might be just as confused as you are.

If you want this to go forward there isn't going to be any substitute for talking to him and trying to figure out what he might mean, what he might want and what he expects. Crucially though, for this to work you have to figure out what you mean and what you want. I don't know what you are thinking and how far ahead you are thinking, but if you are thinking far ahead you might well have to answer for yourself how much uncertainty you can take for the chance to get there.
posted by tallus at 5:20 PM on September 27, 2008 [4 favorites]

nthing tallus, bingo and Zhivota. I think you need to check that you're reading from the same hymn sheet here, and then see if it's salvageable from there... in other words, talk to him, it can't do any harm.
posted by Chairboy at 5:37 PM on September 27, 2008

Wow, thanks you guys. This forum is SOOO much better than Yahoo Answers. Very thorough and I appreciate all the different perspectives and feedback. (yes, even the blunt ones)

I agree, that I shouldn't have used "commitment" prior, esp. w/o defining it with him. But unfortunately, both of us were drunk - as that was poor judgment too on a date- therefore, feels like a classic "When Harry met Sally" situation. But yeah, I realize his actions aren't too cool, so I'm glad to get your opinions (which solidified some of my own thinking) going into this meeting with him. I haven't quite figured out where I stand yet, but I agree, I do think there definitely were some cultural misunderstandings. Will see later on this week.

Thank you again everyone.
posted by freshsprout at 7:37 PM on September 27, 2008

when I hear commitment I think of (intent to) live together, marry have children etc

FWIW, I'm a 36 y.o. woman in California, and this sums it up for me, too. If someone said that to be before sex and before about 8 months to a year of dating I'd be running for the hills.

As others have said, I think you might want to clarify with him what the word means to you. If it just means "exclusive," which is around here is how you ask for monagamy, he'd likely be more open to it. I'd agree it's a cultural difference, but it might not be a transatlantic one. (btw, is Ca. Canada? Or California?)
posted by small_ruminant at 9:35 PM on September 27, 2008 [1 favorite]

That's "said that to me," not "said that to be."
posted by small_ruminant at 9:36 PM on September 27, 2008

as a guy, the older we get, the harder it is to change.
i'd say it's not about the sex.
i'd say he enjoys his life, and he doesnt want soemthing heavy.
dont overanalyse it.
but if you are sure you kno what you want,
you need to be upfront and see how ytou go
posted by edtut at 11:35 PM on September 27, 2008 [1 favorite]

I'm British, have lived in both the UK and US, and totally disagree with other Brit's perception of dating. Where I've lived in the US, people are just as inclined to drink/sex first and relationship later (or not on the latter), they are perhaps just not as open about it. I have also never started any relationship in this way, whether dating British or other nationalities, yes I know people who have/do, but I know equally as many people who don't! I don't think its a major cultural issue; more a person to person issue, together with the environment they grew up in. What I do see is that other nationalities perceive different cultures as being different; the conversation here shows that; for example, the british girls at the grad school I went to were perceived as being very reserved and not 'available', the british boys pretty much just had to stand there whilst american girls threw themselves at them (and don't get me started on how popular the australian lads were!). In contrast, when american students came over to my British university for JYA, the american girls were seen as slutty, the guys sexy. It's ridiculous double standards in my opinion, but hey ho. My own experience is that people are pretty much the same in terms of dating and their own experiences will affect whether they want commitment or not, and how they start and progress relationships.

As far as cultural meanings of commitment, to me it means being committed to that person and monogamous, but not necessarily lets get married and have babies right now. I think most British people would have that view. And freshspout, I have been exactly where you are, except in what was supposed to be a committed relationship. It sucks, but it's not worth allowing yourself to get trapped in, believe me. I wouldn't even be friends until you are confident you can both commit to being just that. This guy is either 'just not that into you', or has issues with commitment. You can't do anything about either, but you can choose to do what's right for you.
posted by nunoidia at 12:03 AM on September 28, 2008

Maybe you could clarify what actions you mean by 'commitment', and then use those words rather than commitment, which sometimes causes all sorts of drama.

I remember a variation of this when anitanita-partner and I got into a fight because he said he didn't miss me (we live in different cities). Not personal, he said. He doesn't miss anyone. Seriously. His mom, childhood friends. Nobody. Oh-kkkaayyyyy.....

After going round and round, dragging poor buddha's name and the concept of detachment into all sorts of drama, it seemed easier to actually figure out what actions I wanted behind the words.

I wanted us to be monogamous. (check!)
I wanted him to think of me, and be one of the first people he call's when something wonderful or awful happens (check!)
I wanted us to talk several times a week (check!)

Not very detailed, I know. But these are all the things I think you do if and because and when you miss them. And I imagined these were the things you didn't do if you didn't miss them.

Here's the thing. He does all of these things. God only knows what he calls them in his mind (cause clearly, he wouldn't define it a missing me. Loving me, yes. Missing me, no). You can probably see I still find this hair splitting of missing vs. loving eye-roll worthy. He probably finds my take eye-roll worthy as well. But once I realized I was actually happily experiencing everything I wanted, I backed the hell up off him on the terminology. So we have a common agreement of actions, but not language usage. I can deal with that. I just imagine he's from another country, like the way my lovely foreign father keeps saying 'lift' when everybody else in the family knows it's an elevator. :)
posted by anitanita at 1:25 AM on September 28, 2008 [2 favorites]

I'm not a guy, but understand a thing or two when it comes to these issues. There simply no chemistry and you're not flipping his switches - i.e. he's got an ideal image of a woman in his mind - and you're not it. Oh well. If platonic is enough maybe it would work. But even there I wouldn't push it.
posted by watercarrier at 3:21 AM on September 28, 2008

The question is not whether the attraction has died on his part, really, because no one is going to know except him and you can't really ask him, but is the attraction still there on your part? I'm going to disagree with a lot of people here and say if this is what you want, and you're not too hurt and really think this person is worth being with, you're doing the right thing by staying friends. the reality is you may end up just being a friend. but that will turn out to have been the natural thing all along and by that stage you won't really mind.

having gone through a very similar situation myself recently, and having listened to a whole host of 'he's not that into you' and 'you came on too strong' type crap, I would say ignore a lot of that sort of advice. They're narratives that often enough don't fit the intricacy of relations between adults, if they make you feel better, it's fair enough, but it made me feel pissed off and misunderstood and also increasingly blame myself. It's the sort of advice that really tends to put the blame on the woman when its clear that the man hurtling around and is a total mess. By the sounds of things, you were just 'doing' a romantic relationship with good will and enthusiasm and interest, and he couldn't come up to scratch and so tried to control it and his feelings, which are evidently conflicted, by breaking up with you (like how can anyone know what they want 'long term' within the first few weeks?) it doesn't mean he doesn't think you're a great girl or have strong feelings towards you (which will dissipate with time, as will yours, if you leave him alone, but as long as you're still in contact whether its friendly or less friendly, you'll both still have a degree of investment) but if you're still friendly, and in contact, anything is possible if you want it and just keep in touch and at a safe distance for you. It just might take a lot of patience.
posted by iamnotateenagegirl at 4:13 AM on September 28, 2008 [2 favorites]

And just a reminder, just because some guys don't want to be in a committed relationship without having had sex yet, there are other guys who are likely fine with this arrangement. Don't settle for less.
posted by Atreides at 8:14 AM on September 28, 2008 [1 favorite]

There's nothing wrong with him. It's possible for a man to be sexually attracted to someone without wanting to be in a long term committed relationship with her. Sounds like he's expressed that's how he feels about you. What's wrong is that you don't want that. You should refuse what he is offering.
posted by ikkyu2 at 11:37 AM on September 28, 2008

You need to do what you want to do. He needs to do what he wants to do.

It seems like the two of you want different things from a dating relationship. Neither of you need to change. But if you're that far apart on what you want, you're probably not a good match.

Move on.
posted by Sidhedevil at 12:36 PM on September 28, 2008 [1 favorite]

Recently he admitted that he still thought of me, even sexually but he doesn't know if he sees us long term.

Stand up for yourself. "Well, please be sure to let me know if that ever changes. I hope you understand that in the meantime I'll be moving on and trying to meet guys who feel differently, so it would be awkward if you and I continued to see each other. I just can't risk getting emotionally entangled with someone who can't concede to the possibility of something more serious down the road." Etc.

He'll either be relieved to be off the hook, have his pride injured and expose himself as a jerk by trying harder to seduce you, or think on it and perhaps grow a pair and accept your challenge. But really, until you do something about it, it's just a delicious ego trip for him to spend time with someone like you. Guys unconsciously string girls along like this for so long that in some cases, it constitutes a man's entire dating experience.
posted by [NOT HERMITOSIS-IST] at 4:40 PM on September 28, 2008 [1 favorite]

I've read your post, and your responses, and I still don't know exactly what you mean by "commitment". At any rate, whatever he understood it to mean, he doesn't want it, at least right now. Frankly though, it sounds like you're putting up a lot of barriers to this relationship at the get go: insisting on commitment, not talking for three weeks, then "testing" him. I have to say it sounds like you are less interested in clear communication than playing strange games. He's being quite straightforward; are you doing the same?
posted by oneirodynia at 6:02 PM on September 28, 2008 [2 favorites]

Also realize that even if you do attempt to clarify your intentions to him, that won't necessarily change anything. When I've been in similar situations I've fallen into the trap of "maybe if I just tell him THIS, he'll see the light." For me, that's never worked.
posted by girlmightlive at 5:49 AM on September 29, 2008 [2 favorites]

<>>

Watercarrier et all: Actually in the beginning of our dating, he was totally more into me than I was into him. Meaning, he courted me.. did the whole gentlemanly holding the door open, paid for many things (I tried to pay for some, wouldn't let me), obviously drove the 2 hrs away to come see me and was just very attentive and romantic. A friend was with me on one outing and she told me later that he would gaze/look at me when I wasn't watching. He never left my side wherever we went. We shared a few long kisses after our second date and he looked incredibly happy.

So, I would say there definitely was spark and chemistry? That's why I couldn't believe it when he said he wasn't feeling it. And in the beginning dates, he said he was looking for a long-term relationship. So that's why I was confused when he later said he didn't want one.

Hmm. That and some other things he told me recently are starting to not add up. So did that one night together really screw things up? (which caused the domino effect later..?)

I'm sorry if I sound naive... and no, I wasn't trying to play any games myself. I *really* tried to make it work and liked him. I felt like he was the first man who I actually connected with physically, mentally and was completely uninhibited around him. I really have had difficult times with relationships as I don't have much of a clue how American dating works. I'm an ABC Chinese and my parents have a very dysfunctional, unloving marriage. I didn't date in school and my college relationships were stupid 22-yr old flings. So I'm trying to learn as I go.
posted by freshsprout at 7:46 AM on September 30, 2008

And in the beginning dates, he said he was looking for a long-term relationship. So that's why I was confused when he later said he didn't want one.


From my perspective, it seems like he was trying to say whatever he thought was necessary to get into your pants. Once you outlined that it wasn't going to be so simple, he turned off his attraction and decided to move on for easier targets. Good riddance?
posted by Atreides at 5:11 PM on September 30, 2008 [1 favorite]

Given the new information about the guy aggressively pursuing you, and doing all the "romantic" door-opening (etc) stuff, he now sounds like a bit of a player, and I'm inclined to agree with Atreides (but that's because I'm rather cynical about traditionalised courting, as one big hokey role-playing exercise).

But really, you'll probably never know what was going on in his head. Maybe his ex turned up on the scene. Maybe he was dating other people, and made a decision in somebody else's favour. Maybe he didn't feel the right chemistry from what physical intimacy you had. It could be almost anything.

But please don't go beating yourself up & wondering what you did "wrong". You're entirely within your rights to set limits on how far you go physically, and how fast. It's possible that these limits didn't work for this particular guy, but there'll be others who are looking for exactly what you're offering, so don't be discouraged.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:42 PM on September 30, 2008 [1 favorite]