How can I learn to be more manipulative?

March 16, 2009 9:07 PM

How can I learn to be more manipulative?

28 year old woman, dating men. 4 or 5 semi-serious relationships, all ended up with the "I like you, but I'm just not excited about this relationship."

All of my relationships seem to follow the same pattern, and after a thorough post-mortem with friends of both genders and my sister, I have come to the conclusion that I am not manipulative and demanding enough. I basically make the decision while early in the flirty/friend stage whether or not I'm into someone, then approach the whole thing openly and transparently, and that ultimately this translates into an availability that is destructive in building long term interest.

My sister and I "blame" our hippie, equality-feminist mother, who met dad at 18 and is totally, insanely guileless in her relationships. I think I basically recognize the problem, but I don't even begin to know how to fix it.

I'm willing to try both self-help or therapy, but I don't even know how one tries to find cognitive-behavioral therapy that focuses on relationships in this sense. Any advice?

In terms of the traditional strategies: be "busy", don't call first, etc, even when I do these things, it doesn't change much. I feel like i'm following the social conventions, but somehow the lack of game-playing or reserve is leaking through.

How do I learn to tamp down the earnestness and play hard to get a little more? I don't really think directions about waiting X number of days are the most helpful, because it's the underlying attitude that I'm failing at. However, I will yield to the wisdom of the mob, if there are some strategies you think are essential.

posted by mercredi to human relations (55 answers total)

This might be the most misogynistic comment I have ever heard from a self-described "woman".

Are you seriously saying that women who are in heterosexual relationships are successful in that way because they are manipulative?

Dude, stop taking advice from your frat brothers and think for yourself.
posted by hal_c_on at 9:11 PM on March 16, 2009 [26 favorites]

Any advice?

Yes: Don't pursue this plan of action.
posted by Flunkie at 9:15 PM on March 16, 2009 [11 favorites]

How about instead of being manipulative, you be confident and up-front, and deal with the disappointment if it happens? What makes you certain that your emotional availability is destructive to long-term relationships? Do you think that a serious relationship that wouldn't have worked out without careful effort to game someone into long-term interest is going to be one you'll be happy in for long?

I know this might seem harsh or dismissive, but words like "long-term interest" and "serious" next to "manipulative" and "game-playing" really make me feel like you're missing the point, unless the point is stability or shelter at all costs above an emotional connection. It seems you want something out of a relationship, you've been in relationships with other people that didn't want the same thing, so they ended. Less communication is rarely the solution to these kinds of problems.
posted by thedaniel at 9:15 PM on March 16, 2009 [6 favorites]

I don't necessarily think that this is a great idea, but i've heard both good and bad about The Rules.
posted by DeltaForce at 9:16 PM on March 16, 2009 [3 favorites]

The fastest way to end a relationship with me, a mid-20s man, is to seem to be demanding and manipulative, instead of open and transparent. I like it when a girl calls first, and I hate "game-playing." I don't like "hard to get," though that's misleading to say - I in fact unthinkingly interpret "hard to get" as "uninterested" and stop calling.

In short: This is not an answer to your question, because I think you're asking for how to sabotage yourself.
posted by Tomorrowful at 9:16 PM on March 16, 2009 [5 favorites]

I think therapy and self-help are both good ideas, but not for the reason you think. "Insanely guileless" in relationships is a goal, not a stumbling block.

Think of it this way - would you want to find out your future partner wrote a post asking for this kind of advice? Nobody seeking a healthy relationship wants to be manipulated.

Take time to get yourself sorted out, and when you get back into the dating game, I bet you'll attract/be attracted to a very different kind of person.
posted by Space Kitty at 9:20 PM on March 16, 2009 [6 favorites]

Forget the tactics. Be open. Be brave. Be yourself.

Focusing on tactics rather than being only prolongs the inevitable, whatever the inevitable may be.

If he will love you and wants to spend a good portion (if not all) of his life with you, he's going to want to see *you*, not some manufactured personality.

If he will not love you, then when you finally get through the stratagems and the rules, you'll finally have to be yourself, and he'll finally leave.

My wife was this way with me, and we've been married for 9 years in a great relationship.

So, don't worry about how to make the person who won't love you love you. Find the person who loves you for being yourself.

Good luck. You are in my thoughts.
posted by davidamann at 9:20 PM on March 16, 2009 [2 favorites]

4 or 5 semi-serious relationships, all ended up with the "I like you, but I'm just not excited about this relationship."

This tells me that you've been dating the wrong people. It's not necessarily you.
posted by Cat Pie Hurts at 9:21 PM on March 16, 2009

Sorry, sorry, slightly tongue-in-cheek opening question.

Seriously, though, here's the deal. Everyone talks the talk about how they want no game-playing, no B.S., but in reality, there's an element of reserve and holding yourself back (concealment, not dishonesty) that I think is actually important in building long-term interest.
posted by mercredi at 9:24 PM on March 16, 2009 [1 favorite]

Everyone talks the talk about how they want no game-playing, no B.S., but in reality, there's an element of reserve and holding yourself back (concealment, not dishonesty) that I think is actually important in building long-term interest.

So is your argument here that:

1. Everyone does this "concealment, not dishonesty" that's necessary to get to the long-term.
or
2. you think the "concealment, not dishonesty" is important to get to the long-term.


Maybe it would be more helpful to tell (since you're being so open) what exactly you said (or think you said) that would have been better to remain under "concealment" for the overall purpose.
posted by hal_c_on at 9:28 PM on March 16, 2009

I am a lot like you in relationships. It has definitely scared a few people off, that I kind of wear my heart on my sleeve and am pretty open about it when I'm excited about someone. Each time I get rejected and suspect it's because I didn't hold back quite enough, I start to think maybe I should have held back more and not shown my cards so early. (I am, in fact, in that situation right now.)

But I've also had a couple of fantastic relationships begin with guys who were a lot like me, and those early months where both of us were so excited and so happy totally make up for the guys that just didn't work out.

Plus, when I think about it a bit, I really like that quality in myself, that I am so honestly optimistic about relationships and their potential. It's tempting to change that trait when I'm confronted with someone who finds it unattractive in me, but I've had success finding people who like it too, and it sucks to think I'd give up something I kind of admire about myself just for some lame guy.
posted by adiabat at 9:30 PM on March 16, 2009 [8 favorites]

Maybe you could give some concrete examples of things you do that you think are too open and transparent? Just to make sure that you and the answerers are not talking at cross-purposes.

(I also don't think the strategies you've detailed as "hard to get" are a very good idea, btw. You would just end up in a relationship full of tension and mistrust, if not actual distrust. Open and honest not having gotten the right results so far probably just means you haven't met the right person yet.)
posted by frobozz at 9:31 PM on March 16, 2009

I strongly disagree. While you don't need to go all radical honesty on the first date, this "holding yourself back" is not appealing. I'd much rather get to know a woman without artificial barriers than to be meted out cunning dollops of who she is. All the more so when she formulates her strategy based on the input of pseudonymous nerds on the internet.
posted by Admiral Haddock at 9:34 PM on March 16, 2009

How can I learn to be more manipulative?

Subscribe to Cosmo.
posted by wfrgms at 9:36 PM on March 16, 2009 [8 favorites]

I agree with frobozz - if you truly feel that being open and honest is ruining your chances with men, give us some examples of what you're doing. Because I don't buy it.

I have never been anything but completely 100% open and honest with the guys I've dated and it has never resulted in the guy running for the hills. I couldn't play the "game" if I tried, I'm too damn emotional, stuff like that is too damn stressful, and I'm not interested in hooking a guy that way. Seems to me that the guys you need to "hook" with manipulation are not the guys you want to be settling down with.

So you've had some bad luck. Four or five semi-serious relationships isn't that bad, and the fact that they got to the semi-serious stage is a good sign. Maybe you're picking the wrong men? Do you always go for a certain type? Relationships should develop naturally and spontaneously. Strategizing and scheming and overanalyzing everything will only prevent this from happening.
posted by keep it under cover at 9:49 PM on March 16, 2009 [1 favorite]

If anything, showing vulnerability will only encourage the guy to open up more himself. The last thing you want when you're trying to get to know someone is to keep running into walls, especially the artificial variety. If the guys you've been dating balk at the first sign of weakness or vulnerability, or try to exploit or take advantage of that, YOU should be the one heading for the hills.
posted by keep it under cover at 9:53 PM on March 16, 2009

This would be unwise. Your issues involve the guy-picking, not your ability to keep dudes who don't deserve keeping.

I'm not saying don't be mysterious, but I think you don't really need to play games when you meet the right guy.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:54 PM on March 16, 2009 [3 favorites]

Oh... and to clarify, I'm too damn emotional to try to hide my feelings (is what I meant to say).
posted by keep it under cover at 9:55 PM on March 16, 2009

Oh the best CBT relationship book is Intimate Connections
posted by Ironmouth at 9:56 PM on March 16, 2009 [2 favorites]

If you had asked for ways to appear less eager, you would have had a different response. People are reacting to the word "manipulative."
posted by CunningLinguist at 10:18 PM on March 16, 2009 [3 favorites]

ok. to clarify - I don't know what it is exactly, that's sort of the problem. Under direct examination friends and roommates have given, the "you're not being cagey enough, you need to be more self-protective and play hard to get."

I think it's hard to pin down because it's not saying or doing something explicit, but rather an emotional state where, once I've decided I'm psyched about seeing where something might go, I'm there. I think it might be related to needing to hold back, and get committed by degrees.

Maybe it's that, coupled with an attempt to act normally by the don't call yet rules, that leaves a relationship without either the reckless, through-yourself-in energy, or the thrill of playing heard to get .
posted by mercredi at 10:19 PM on March 16, 2009

re:"manipulative" word choice -- it was a bad idea, but just the product of frustration and the advice (also tongue-in-cheek) of a number of girlfriends that "I just need to be more manipulative."
posted by mercredi at 10:21 PM on March 16, 2009

The Rules pretty much covers this. Who knows if it is good advice, but it is exactly the advice you are looking for.
posted by jayder at 10:24 PM on March 16, 2009 [1 favorite]

Maybe I (as a guy) am dating a girl, and she is acting in a whole bunch of unexpected, unexplainable, irrational, unpredictable ways, and it is seriously hurting me, and our relationship.

I could post on AskMe, and ask "What could be causing this strange behavior in my girlfriend?" and some people would read it, and some of those people would post, and some of those posts might be helpful to me.

Or I could post on AskMe and ask "Why is my girlfriend a crazy bitch? She must be on the rag, amirite?" and get a whole ton of people reading it, and a whole mountain of posts, very few of which even attempted to address what I was actually trying to understand.


Now, to answer the question you asked: my belief is that you can't find someone who likes you by pretending to be someone else.
posted by paisley henosis at 10:30 PM on March 16, 2009 [1 favorite]

ok.

1) Humor:helpfulness balance was broken in the initial question. I sincerely apologize. Please see clarifications throughout.

2) I'm not looking for "the rules". I think that it's like if I was incapable of being sarcastic, but kept responding completely earnestly, I wouldn't want advice on being a bitch, but would need to figure out how to develop a little edge.

I think I'm missing out on some of the tension/advance and retreat/playing hard to get that's related to both flirting and sarcasm. It's not mean or deceitful, but it has just enough edge/mystery to be interesting.
posted by mercredi at 10:39 PM on March 16, 2009

...but in reality, there's an element of reserve and holding yourself back (concealment, not dishonesty) that I think is actually important in building long-term interest.

Mercredi, I'll buck the trend here: I agree with this. I'm a guy, and I am all about being honest and not "playing games," but I think concealment can be good. Obvious disclaimer: Not with everyone, not in all cases, and only to a certain extent.

It is possible to be too easy in characteristics other than promiscuity. Obviously, it depends on the guy, but some (maybe those you've dated) enjoy the challenge of attracting/wooing/impressing a woman. Not only do they enjoy it, but you will benefit from it as well. And the key thing is that not only do they enjoy it, but they can lose interest if it's gone.

---

Tom and Janet like each other. Tom and Janet start dating. Tom learns what Janet likes, plans creative dates, and truly enjoys doing things for her. Janet likes Tom immensely and feels perfectly comfortable with him; she tells him this in many different ways.

--PAUSE-- Now, at this point, the following is how it could continue. I'm not saying it's always like this, or even usually (I have no idea), but it could. I wish it wouldn't, but it can happen: --UNPAUSE--

Tom feels completely secure in the relationship and slides into an unexciting steady state in which he no longer thinks much about doing special things or feels any need to win over Janet.

---

That's one way your situations may have come about. (Notice that it can work with the genders swapped, though. Replace either Janet or Tom with yourself, and see which fit you. From either side, the relationship became unexciting.)

The point, though, is that overexposing your feelings can lead to lowered interest on the other side.

So how to avoid it?

First, don't be manipulative. I'd throw anything that smells like manipulation out the window. You're not a manipulative person, you don't really want to be, and any guy that gets a whiff of manipulation won't be too thrilled. And I'd say that any mechanical "wait X days" behaviors are manipulative and to be avoided. Especially because they'll probably come across as unnatural or arbitrary.

A friend of mine recently decided that a girl he went on a few dates with "might be a Rules girl," and he lost interest because of it.

Like you said, it's a mindset or attitude you want to change. Changing your attitude is not easy. Be mindful of it. Why do you want to be so open? What makes you tell a guy everything right away? If you can identify some of that, maybe you can then balance it against the potential risk outlined above.

And you know what? Despite everything I've just said, I pretty much agree with everyone else here. I think that what you are recognizing is true, but I think you're overestimating it's importance. I doubt this was the primary issue in your relationships; any positive effect you might get from changing your behavior with regard to it will be minor; and you can easily do more harm than good for yourself by going too far.

MeMail me if you want to discuss it more.
posted by whatnotever at 11:07 PM on March 16, 2009 [2 favorites]

The worst, most despicable thing about manipulative, contrived behavior in relationships is that... um... it often works.

Or, actually, what's worse than that is the fact that transparent, earnest, guileless behavior can sometimes be counterproductive.

Uggh.

But instead of setting up a binary of "manipulative" vs. "guileless," or "reserved" vs. "eager," why not turn the question somewhat...

and ask, "'Eager' about what?" "'Enthusiastic' in what particular ways?"

Yes, you're eager and enthusiastic about the guy you like... but since at least some guys, for whatever reasons, *possibly* want more of a "challenge"... how can you be eager and enthusiastic towards a guy you honestly like, while giving him a sense of challenge and achievement... *outside* the relationship?

Instead of trying to fake being Enigmatic or Mercurial or Cleopatra or the French Lieutenant's Woman-- instead of making your emotional connection to him ("She likes me/likes me not") the challenge-- use your enthusiasm to encourage him to find physical adventures you two can engage in together, and in very close proximity. (Going to the gym at the same time doesn't qualify.) Try occasional bungee jumping, rock climbing-- whatever boosts the heart rate, causes adrenal release, and offers a hint of physical danger; physical intensity creates bonding.

Shared cardiovascular workout is much healthier, emotionally and physically, than Big Drama... even though Big Drama is what lots of people instinctively fall back on, in order to create excitement in a relationship.
posted by darth_tedious at 11:08 PM on March 16, 2009 [4 favorites]

Okay, I get what you were after with the "manipulative" bit, and I'm not misinterpreting you, BUT.

I think you're possibly on the wrong track. Earnestness is just not something you should try to train out of yourself. If you can be honest with yourself and other people about who you are and what you want, don't even THINK of changing those habits, because you might find they're hard to change back.

But you say you aren't demanding enough. This I can get behind. So, I would simply advise you to stop trying to be alluring and to star accepting how rewarding you are to get. Keep yourself happy in the moment, don't invest too much in other people, don't treat new boyfriends like husbands, don't give people too much credit, use them a little more for whatever whims you might have. Want to see him tonight? Insist! Want him to leave you alone? Say so. That's earnest too, but it isn't boring. Just enjoy it, moment to moment. Surely you're worth working with. Surely playing along with your desires will be greatly pleasureable to the right partner.

If you are settling into earnest contentment with your partner too soon, there's something else missing. I can't believe you know exactly what you want and get it so easily. That would be the only boringness I could imagine. Availability isn't boring on its own. So please yourself, don't cooperate so much, accommodate so much, grant that primacy to your other so easily. Be a little more selfish. It's better than being manipulative!
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 12:36 AM on March 17, 2009 [7 favorites]

Okay, for what it's worth, back in the single days, I'd jump headfirst into relationships and wear my heart on my sleeve and scare the fuck out of the guy. The "trick" was to postpone sex. That postponed intimacy (mental, emotional), gave us time to get to know each other, and anticipate our joining. I seriously advise against any sort of manipulation or game playing, because when you're partnered up, there's nothing IMO more destructive, and you'd have to unlearn it.
posted by b33j at 12:51 AM on March 17, 2009

I'm a guy and I think I may have experienced something similar to what you're talking about. I have literally been told by ex-girlfriends, "You are too nice."

My analysis was that I'm not demanding enough - that I made the relationship too easy for the other person and consequently a degree of investment or ownership that might have developed from her having to go out of her way for me or otherwise compromise for my sake didn't develop. I guess that parallels your idea that you need to be more manipulative. But I haven't managed to persuade myself to behave any differently in relationships, so it's pretty much an untested hypothesis.

Good luck.
posted by XMLicious at 2:16 AM on March 17, 2009 [4 favorites]

Guy perspective: As someone said, this is not a realm of the binary. Shades of gray.

Have long heard the play-hard-to-get thoughts, that the way to generate interest is to appear at least somewhat uninterested--relative to men and women. Not my comfort zone, but I and others have noticed more than a few times that when we are genuinely, I dunno, iffy, seeing some good things and concerning things, not ready to move on, but not feeling new-person excitement, the other person ramps up their efforts.

"I'm a gonna win him/her over."

I can well believe it works a not-trivial amount of time when it's more playing games than an honest reaction. Ick.

Recently read that most people have a soft spot in their hearts for the music that was popular when they were in high school--my sis and other '77 grads being perhaps exceptions because two huge songs that year were Tonight's The Night and You Light Up My Life--though as someone approaching their 30th h.s. reunion, dating can feel too much like high school.

I have throttled back on expressions of early enthusiasm, though not in a black-or-white way or in a way that feels too much not myself and burning energy/thoughts trying to be someone I'm not.

Sure, we all (hopefully) have first/second dates where we think, "It's the best first/second dates in three months" or six months or three years or ever, feel enthused about things of substance--more than a great smile, sweet body, etc.

My inclination is to relate enthusiasm not in a best-in-time-frame context (not thinking/saying things like "mom's gonna luv you," "I had this lovely mental image of us doddering around making tea for each other when we're 80") and relate what I like and admire--attitude, kindness, compassion, brains, lots to talk about, simple fun of being together, maybe something not a big point about something physical, etc.--all the while not pushing things physical.

More than a couple women have been taken aback by this, related it's surprising to hear someone being open and genuine, not out for action on the first, second, third date.

That said, one never knows any number of important things.

Someone's line that for some people, the only thing worse than a first date going badly is it going well, that's one that seems to hold some water... and I darn sure have heard women relating that guys can come across as seeming to have that mindset.

"Eek! Run as if being chased by a hungry lion with a rattlesnake riding on its back."

Also much a sense from experience, and what women relate, that plenty of people ain't over the last go-round, it in a time-frame where it's more to be expected to some degree or far enough out that it's worrisome.

To be sure, all the while a real prospect that the other person simply doesn't feel a sufficiently similar level of interest.

I guess the point is that there there's value in small adaptations to the dating approach--that don't involve discomfort, feeling false--to the approach--with an ongoing awareness that lots of these things end fairly quickly for more reasons than we can count or know.
posted by ambient2 at 2:57 AM on March 17, 2009

The people giving you grief in this thread for using the word "manipulative" are overreacting, and the guys claiming that 100% instant total honesty and openness is what attracts may be atypical. My view: dating is meant to be fun - at least partly a game - and games are fun precisely because of arbitrary rules that create a framework for the playing. The right kind of tension is infinitely more exciting than no tension at all.

However, that does not mean that this is necessarily what your problem is, of course. I suspect that in many people's cases - I don't know you, obviously, so can't say if this applies - hunting for "the right strategy" is often a distraction from addressing some other issue: the kind of men you're targeting, or deeper core beliefs about relationships, or self-esteem stuff, or, etc etc. Intimate Connections, mentioned above, is a great book.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 4:39 AM on March 17, 2009 [3 favorites]

Here's the key: Adjust your relationship goals and continue to be 100% honest.

I'd suggest the following as healthy relationship goals for you:
1. I'm going to date for a while and meet new people. I'm not going to fall head over heels for the first person who comes along.
2. I expect that I will date more than one guy before I find a really good candidate for a long-term relationship.
3. I will give myself time to critically judge each candidate in order to see how compatible we are.
4. I will continue to date a person as long as I feel there's a potential for a long-term relationship between us.

I'm not saying that those are the only healthy relationship goals, but they seem to match up with your desire to develop a successful long-term relationship with someone, while not coming off as too needy.

With those as your goals (or some version of them adjusted to meet your needs), you can now be honest with your dates and with yourself without being seen as needy or dependent from date #1.

I can tell you that this method has worked extremely well for me. After a string of ho-hum relationships, some with women who were not good matches for me, I changed my goals from "I want a long-term intimate relationship now" to something more laid back. I was completely honest with my dates about my intentions, and I met up with / dated several women before finding one who was really a good match.
posted by syzygy at 5:13 AM on March 17, 2009 [1 favorite]

You don't want and cannot anyhow change your personality or outlook on life. What you need is to find someone who is a good match for your personality as it is.

For a relationship to start you need physical attraction. For it to continue you need common interests, and for it to last you need matching personality and outlook on life. You need all three layers, so if you are shooting for a long-term relationship it's worth making sure that they are all there before you get into a relationship.
posted by Hediot at 5:19 AM on March 17, 2009

4 or 5 semi-serious relationships, all ended up with the "I like you, but I'm just not excited about this relationship."

This says to me that you just haven't found the right guy yet. These guys you mention just didn't feel like it was working for them. The chemistry wasn't right, the spark was missing, or whatever. And if it isn't there for the other person, you can't manufacture it. Hell, they can't manufacture it. If you do the Rules or whatever and play hard to get and make it hard for the guy to get to know you, you're only going to postpone the inevitable, because sooner or later he will get to know you and find out things aren't working for him.

I'm not even going to tell you not to come on too strong. In my early twenties I had a roommate who was what a boyfriend of mine at the time called a "throw at". She was dying to get married. After a good first meeting with someone off some dating service, she was all over him, calling him every day, telling all her friends about him, expecting an instant relationship, making plans, and expecting that they'd be engaged within six months. In one case she bought one guy's mother an expensive birthday present before she had even met the woman. As misguided and needy as I found her actions, I still don't think she was sabotaging any viable relationships. Guys either wanted her too, or they weren't interested. Her actions neither created that mutual interest nor destroyed it.

Relationships are founded on a natural dynamic and a connection between two people, not on unilateral maneuvres and machinations. I don't recommend that you try to "work" the situation in any way. Just be yourself. Keep meeting as many people as you can and get to know them, and be sensitive to their responses to you, and sooner or later something will take.
posted by orange swan at 5:28 AM on March 17, 2009 [1 favorite]

There's a difference between being open and honest and pooping with the door open after your third date.
posted by solipsophistocracy at 6:15 AM on March 17, 2009

The guys like you, because you're not disagreeable, but they're not excited by the relationship because, for better or worse, you're not exciting. This is not, inherently, a bad thing. Some guys dislike excitement, and they do like routine.

Many guys enjoy excitement and a challenge. But it has to be a real, genuine challenge, not some artificial bullshit. A guy's going to be a lot more interested in getting a woman's attention if she's genuinely busy and needs to convince her that he's worth her time, than if she's just meting out time for him based on the Rules. Being hard-to-get is OK, playing hard-to-get is not.

If it feels like a game, if it's fake, if it's bullshit, stop. Everything else is OK though. It's OK to be selfish, it's OK to have your own opinions, it's OK to disagree. Having a totally agreeable and passive partner can be boring. Be available enough to carry on the relationship, but don't keep yourself available. If there's something on Saturday you want to do, plan on it. If he calls to ask about Saturday, tell him you have plans, but invite him to tag along.

In short, have a life and integrate the relationship into it. Never set aside your life to make room for the relationship. Accept that you'll never be the smoky, mysterious girlfriend, but there's plenty of room in the world for enthusiastic, involved girlfriends.
posted by explosion at 6:19 AM on March 17, 2009 [2 favorites]

I agree that your clarifications throughout point directly to The Rules, which are not about "being a bitch" as you say, but setting boundaries on when and how you respond to the guy(s) you're dating. You might also try Why Men Love Bitches.

However.

I think you're going about this wrong, and I think your experiences so far have more to say about your previous partners than about you. I think you're too old to be taking advice like "be more manipulative" from your girlfriends.

Think about how you would like a guy to treat you, and behave like that. Would you like him to play silly games, hold things back, keep his affection a secret? Or would you like him to be straightforward and honest with you? You haven't explained specifically what you're doing--are you coming on way too strong or simply being too available and dropping everything else in your life for someone you've known for three weeks? How serious is semi-serious?

The relationship I'm currently in is the first time I've found someone who's open and insanely guileless, as you say. It's the one I've felt most secure in and happiest, and it says a lot more about my boyfriend than it does about me. So perhaps you need to continue to be you, but start looking for different people.
posted by peanut_mcgillicuty at 6:23 AM on March 17, 2009

Okay, I'm just gonna put this out there:

The guys didn't want to pursue the relationships because you two weren't a great match.

Is that so unthinkable? That happens to everyone, whether they're "manipulative" or not -- and I'm willing to bet it happens more to people that aren't as earnest and transparent, since no one wants to deal with trying to decipher what someone else means. Seriously, everyone I know that has a long term relationship is exactly the opposite of what you've described. Everyone I know that has several failed, short relationships does the game playing you describe.

You can be doing everything right and it doesn't mean your relationships will work out. That's not how people operate. Saying to yourself, "I've had five relationships that didn't work, I must be too open and honest," is just absurd. Almost everyone has several failed relationships before they find one that works. That's like someone saying, "I've had five relationships that didn't work, it must be because I bathe too consistently." Come on.
posted by Nattie at 6:28 AM on March 17, 2009 [6 favorites]

My sister and I "blame" our hippie, equality-feminist mother, who met dad at 18 and is totally, insanely guileless in her relationships. I think I basically recognize the problem, but I don't even begin to know how to fix it.

You know, your mom met a man, married him and (I'm assuming) turned it into a long-term relationship being completely guileless. Does that not say something about how there really isn't a "way" to make a relationship work? It just kinda does, and the ones that don't you learn from trial and error?

Stop thinking you're deficient in some way; you are the way you are, and no amount of posturing or changing the outward projection of yourself will help that. At some point, the real you is going to shine through, the one without the games and they're going to have to be excited about that person to want to continue the relationship. So, you can waste your own time with games or you can continue to be who you are and take your chances.

Personally, the girl who was the same from the first date to our latest kiss is the one I fell head over heels in love with.
posted by David Fleming at 6:35 AM on March 17, 2009

It's NORMAL to have 4 or 5 relationships not work out. It's also normal -- but often wrongheaded -- to look for some sort of deeply-meaningful pattern in the botched relationships. Of course you're going to look for a pattern. You feel powerless, and when people feel powerless, they look for patterns so that the universe doesn't feel so random. So that it feels manageable. "If I understand it, I can do something about it."

Here's the REAL pattern: for MOST people, their first 4 or 5 relationships don't last. A introvert will think, "It's because I'm too introverted." An extrovert will think, "It's because I'm too outgoing." An overweight person will think, "It's because I'm too fat." An honest person will think, "It's because I'm too guileless." And their friends (and sisters) will think these things, too, because they are also looking for patterns.

But the simple truth is that, for most of us, it's hard to find someone you click with. If you suddenly became manipulative (or gained more edge or whatever), you'd still find it hard to click with people. Maybe with different sorts of people.

There's nothing magic you can do to attract and keep men, because there's no such thing as "men." There are just individual guys, each with his own tastes. If you become more edgy, you'll attract the guys who are into edgy girls (at the expense of going against the grain of your personality) and repel the guys who are into openness -- the guys I suspect you'll be more happy with in the end.

If you stay open and honest, you may go through 4 or 5 more guys before you find Mr. Right, because there's more to you than "Ms. Open." And there are more to openness-loving guys than the fact that they like honest women. You and the guy may not click for some other reason. You just need to keep trying until you and some guy click on enough levels to allow for a long-term relationship. You have very little control over this. You just have to keep trying. It's a numbers game, and the odds are ultimately in your favor IF you stay in the game.

With very few exceptions, there's no such thing as a bad personality for dating. If you're really nasty and cruel, that is likely to be a problem. If you're sexless, that's likely to be a problem. If you cheat all the time, that's likely to be a problem. But I can't think of many other traits that are problematic. All sorts of people -- shy, outgoing, loud, quiet, liberal, conservative, edgy, open -- find love. They just don't find it right away.
posted by grumblebee at 7:06 AM on March 17, 2009 [26 favorites]

You are over thinking this. Sometimes relationships don't work out. The answer isn't to try and trick the people you're dating into sticking it out longer. That's probably a recipe for disaster. As others have said, no one wants to be in a relationship that does not involve real honesty. You just need to meet someone new. grumblebee's comment above seems spot on.
posted by chunking express at 8:02 AM on March 17, 2009

Okay, well, I'm going to go with everyone else and say just be yourself because when it's the right match, that will be enough.

BUT if you feel like you're being too open and earnest--- and you feel this is an innate problem with your approach--- then maybe you're wanting to dive in too fast? If this is the case, try to maintain a level of autonomy while you date. A lot of women don't do this.

Like, when you date someone (for the first few months especially), spend time with them, but also keep your life really similar to how it was before you met them.... keep seeing your friends, keep going to the gym, keep vounteering..... whatever..... keep doing all the stuff that you've been doing and want to do. That way you can be earnest and they will see that you are not needy.... or an open book, and, even if it doesn't work out, you will still have a life to return to.

Wish you luck whatever you do!
posted by roxie5 at 8:15 AM on March 17, 2009 [2 favorites]

When I was dating, my best dates and relationships (including the one that ended up in me being married) happened at times when I had a whole lot of other things to do. I went on dates and formed relationships at a pace with my life and all the other things I did at the time; as the relationships got more serious, I made more time. Maybe you are pairing guileless and open with way too much too soon.
posted by oflinkey at 8:16 AM on March 17, 2009 [1 favorite]

Yeah, any sort of "games" or artificial "rules" or outright manipulation aren't good for anyone. These things don't build relationships. They may work to keep someone's interest a bit longer, but at that point, one of you is the cat, and one of you is the person dangling the string. If the cat gets sick of the game, he will leave. And then what?

I can only speak for myself, but I don't want to be in any kind of relationship where the reason someone is with me is anything besides true feelings and equality of respect.

Now, with all that said, it's healthy to have your own "rules". Provided they are reasonable and they are communicated to your partner. Not silly gamesmanship like "never call a boy twice" or "stand at the car door and wait until he reads your mind that you want the door opened". But things that show who you are and how you treat others and expect to be treated.

For my own self, my "rules" are this:

1- Be myself. Never co-opt my personality to try to fit (what I imagine are) the expectations of others. Changing who I am to suit someone else is simply a lie. Eventually, the other person will figure it out, or I will get sick of the lie and return to my true self. That's devastating.

2- But also be a good sport. Maybe I don't care for "Dancing with the Stars". But I like spending time with this person, so what the heck, I'll watch it. The difference is, communicating this. "You like that show? Cool, let's watch it together" is way different from going onto the internet and watching all the back episodes so it seems like I was watching it the whole time.

3- Say what I mean, mean what I say. This is a hard one, because I tend to be very precise in my communications. Or, at least, I think I am. Further, I can tend toward giving simple answers when the meaning is more complex. And I think I tend toward this more than normal people. So when someone asks me if I want to go to the beach this weekend and I say no, they often think that I mean I don't like going to the beach, or that I'd never want to go. But in reality, I was just busy that weekend. So I try to answer a question like that MORE precisely- "Wow, I do want to go to the beach, but I can't this weekend." I'd rather lose a relationship from over-communication than under-communication.

4- (Learned this one here on Mefi. Thanks!) Never doubt (or argue) motivations. If you're doubting motivations, the relationship is doomed.

5- This is another hard one, because I think it wrecked my last relationship. Don't co-opt my responsibilities. I don't have many responsibilities, but I'm not going to blow them off. Meeting my responsibilities is important to me. And I'm not going to take on more responsibilities unless I believe I can meet them, or I reserve the right to beg off if a previous commitment interferes. What makes this especially troublesome is that there's something out there that makes it attractive when someone blows off the world for you. It's a form of selfishness ("Look how important *I* am!") but it's there. I maintain that I'm right, for two reasons- one, it shows that I am a good person and will meet my commitments to her too; two, it reminds both of us that fixating on our relationship alone doesn't work in the long run.

6- Call people out when I think I'm getting manipulated/gamed. Doesn't have to be mean or angry, but a simple "I'm on to you" keeps the balance. I'm convinced that people don't want to be with people they can (or feel like the have to) manipulate. Normal people want to be with an equal, I think. If you know someone is working you, but you choose to give in to it in order to "maintain the peace", the relationship suffers. (Obviously, this doesn't mean being a jerk about it. If someone is planning a surprise party, you'd be a royal ass to wreck it.)

7- Be as honest, trusting and giving as I possibly can. Giving someone trust shows that (besides, you know, trusting them) you can handle it if they DON'T live up to that trust. Making someone earn your trust, to me, shows that you are vulnerable. Caring and sensitive is good, vulnerable and weak is bad. And when you trust someone freely, it's a gift that they will care for. If you make them earn it, it's a thing they bought, which they can use and abuse as they see fit.

8- Compromise whenever you can, but do it openly. A compromise that someone doesn't know you are making isn't a compromise, it's acquiescing. See #6, nobody wants a doormat.

(and 9- Don't be crazy. If I feel myself wanting to break my own rules, I know I'm getting caught up, and need to have a reality check.)

On re reading, I come across as a bit of a tool. Which I don't think I am. I'm not saying that I believe I am more important than the people I date- I wouldn't want to be with someone who didn't have similar rules themselves. I'm just saying that it's not healthy to make oneself subservient to the person or relationship. Partner = good.

If you look at it in another way, the various "games" people play are things that trigger our various mating instincts. Put bluntly, if you play the games right it will probably result in sex. But we're looking for more than that. We want a mate, but we also want a friend. That ain't easy.
posted by gjc at 8:17 AM on March 17, 2009 [14 favorites]

Take this as a grain of salt as someone who, like your mother, is a hippie, equality-feminist who met her partner of 7 years at 18.

My relationship mantra is be cool.

This means that you don't play games. You don't try to manipulate people or situations by with-holding phone calls or whatever if you're interested. Games aren't cool. Be cool.

But this also means that you're honest with yourself about your realistic prospects and chances for compatibility with any given person. This is equally uncool: "Once I've decided I'm psyched about seeing where something might go, I'm there," not because you're making yourself available but because it's much cooler to be more invested in your own life and your own interests than a potential relationship. And it's much cooler to be confident in being single and to just "see where things go" with people than it is to decide, based on fleeting brain chemicals during the first stage of a crush, that you're going to make yourself totally available to someone. Be cool. Don't rush into things.

Think of yourself like the Fonz. The Fonz is always upfront and honest with Richie when he needs relationship advice. The Fonz never lies. But the Fonz is always distinctly himself, whether or not Leather Tuscadero is around. He's still into leather jackets and motorcycles and his hair or hanging out in bathrooms or whatever. He's cool--he retains an air of mystique in part because of his confidence in himself as an independent entity. Your female friends are telling you to be self-protective. This will protect you, not because you're manipulating people but because you're investing more fully in yourself. When you're cool, you'll see that those four or five failed relationships were good things--good experiences that just didn't work out because they weren't the right guys for you and vice versa. When you're cool, you'll realize that it's okay for things not to work out. You still have yourself, indelible and strong.

The best part of this is that it should help you gain confidence as a person, not just in dating. But the bonus is that when you attract someone, they'll be attracted to you--the strongest, best, and coolest version of you. And if they're not excited by that? Fuck em. Clearly, it's their loss.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 8:35 AM on March 17, 2009 [13 favorites]

First manipulative is the wrong word. It's a deliberately provocative diction choice. You have the problem that men aren't excited about the relationships that their having with you. They didn't say they just weren't manipulated enough. They say that they weren't excited. You've decided to have a flattering interpretation where it is a good quality holding you back, in this case your earnestness, and what you really need is a bad quality you don't have. I would suggest that what is holding you back is that in the context of relationships you aren't exciting enough, this is less flattering so I can understand why you would be less likely to see things this way, but I think this interpretation makes more sense and as a bonus you can pursue being a more exciting lover and be more successful and a better person rather than pursuing being more manipulative which would make you maybe more successful but a worse person.

I'm not arguing that manipulation can't make a relationship more exciting. I'm not even arguing that you shouldn't use some arguably manipulative tools toward the end of being more exciting. I'm just saying that I think you've framed the question incorrectly.
posted by I Foody at 10:04 AM on March 17, 2009 [1 favorite]

"Everyone talks the talk about how they want no game-playing, no B.S..."

The second someone says they want no games and no B.S., run screaming the other way and don't look back. This is code for, "I DEMAND drama in all my relationships, and will stop at nothing to create it!"

Real, focused, mature adults don't say things like this because they don't have to.
posted by coolguymichael at 10:18 AM on March 17, 2009 [3 favorites]

I'm with most of the other people here in my belief that intentional game-playing and being "demanding" (ugh!) is a huge turn-off and a really bad idea if you're looking for anything remotely long-term. I'm also sort of disturbed by your statement about your "hippie, equality-feminist mother," who apparently tried to teach you about equality and honesty in relationships.

That said, I'm starting to wonder if maybe your problem isn't openness or honesty, but rather overenthusiastic commitment at too early a stage? Is it possible that you're scaring potential mates off with a Serious Relationship vibe, or even just apparent neediness? Are you actually comfortable being single, and if so, do you think that manages to come across when you're really excited about someone? I for one would want to date a guy who didn't play games and wasn't trying to trick me into anything, but if he decided he was SUPER-SERIOUS about me on the second date I'd probably get a bit freaked too. So if you are in fact putting some intense feelings out there early on (just a guess, of course) then you might try scaling back on what you share at least for a while. I don't consider that manipulative, just tactful.
posted by you're a kitty! at 10:36 AM on March 17, 2009 [1 favorite]

I'd bet you're not hearing the advice people are giving you and are trying to fix the symptoms without addressing the cause. Your "openness" might be a lack of real self-direction or confidence in your own life, which is often what people find attractive (yes, even in women). DOn't fake that confidence by sitting on your hands and not calling and just pretending to be busy - instead, actually go out and be busy.
posted by mdn at 11:20 AM on March 17, 2009

Here's why I think some people see playing games as a means to appear more alluring to the opposite sex.

Many men (and women) are attracted to people who make them somewhat insecure and unsure of themselves. Mild levels of (perhaps drama induced) anxiety can work almost as an aphrodisiac. Uncertainty about the relationship heightens the experience of
limerence.

These people may not fully realize it, but they often measure the intensity of their feelings based on not how comfortable, but how nervous the other person makes them feel - the "does s/he or doesn't s/he...?" . Men like this fall for drama queens and femme fatales, supposedly "enjoying the chase"; women find themselves hopelessly drawn to bad boys or commitment-phobes. It's all about the roller coaster ride: the high you get from the promise of reciprocation, further amplified by the yearning, anxiety and despair of the low end.

If someone makes them feel comfortable and secure, they get bored. That's the "you're too nice" moment. Secretly, people like this want to (or feel like they ought to) suffer a bit.

So, these are the guys you'll have a better chance of ensnaring with tricksy tricks. I'd say your best bet is to look for emotionally mature guys who aren't into this shit, while remaining your wonderful, honest, WYSIWYG self.

It wouldn't hurt to perhaps try to build up your self confidence in the meantime, though - or if that's not an issue, to just enjoy a meaningful, fun life as a single. If you really want to keep someone on their toes a little at the early stages (and to avoid seeming clingy), at least it'll be because you're genuinely awesome and independent and know it. Much better than some manipulative crap.
posted by sively at 2:46 PM on March 17, 2009 [3 favorites]

Four or five relationships doesn't establish a trend, or a pattern, but have you thought about the differences between those that you decide you want to proceed openly and transparently with and those that that you find uninspiring? Are you disinterested in the ones that aren't challenging enough?

Like it or not, many (most?) males place extra value on winning those that are a bit challenging. (Probably some evolutionary biology mixed up in there: think of all those poor peacocks spending their days shimmying for a dollop of peahen attention.) Not women rising to the level of divas or narcissists, though they have their devotees too, but women who value qualities highly enough that they won't fully commit to someone in the flirty stage. Possibly because it might be misinterpreted by some guys as needy? Or just too simple?

As a friend says, "If you want sparks, make friction"
posted by bbranden1 at 6:50 PM on March 17, 2009

Like it or not, many (most?) males place extra value on winning those that are a bit challenging.

I don't think this is true at all.
posted by chunking express at 7:56 PM on March 17, 2009

I'm glad you asked this question, it turned into a great thread.

It's interesting to see that women have a parallel issue to the Nice Guy syndrome. Like a Nice Guy, you think the problem is with men, not with you. But you phrase the question as "How can I be more of jerk like guys/chicks want?" If there are problems, they are yours, but it sounds like you've just had standard dating mishaps. Never believe anything someone tells you about why they're breaking up with you, especially if you've been together less than a year, especially if they have a penis.

Anyway, instead of being manipulative, I would say, particularly with highly intelligent and charming guys (present company included) just don't put up with any bullshit. If a guy makes a bad joke, make fun of him. If he says something rude, tell him so. If he cancels plans, show him you're annoyed about it. If he is making up facts to support an argument, call him on it. And if you disagree with him, do so firmly. Don't go out of your way to be bitchy, and be honest when they do something good too. Mature couples challenge each other intellectually, or so I've heard....my relationships tend to be more about arm-wrestling.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:02 AM on March 18, 2009 [6 favorites]

Looking back two months later. Here's the recap, on the advice and real life. Yeah, hold back a little bit, don't over-commit, don't put up with shit, are all good advice.

And, then on the real life end, this weekend there was conflict and drama, and for the first time in my life, I've had a conversation where I cared about the relationship, but was really ready to walk away if things didn't get better/change. And that was a revelatory experience. I think that's what I've been missing.

But the problem with the advice books is that I'm not sure you can fake it.
posted by mercredi at 8:58 AM on May 19, 2009