Not sure how to do this
April 9, 2011 4:29 PM Subscribe
Normal dating expectations. What are they?
I'm 34, female, and have been in three serious, long-term relationships (lasting 3-7 years each with hardly any time between them).
I know I have a pattern. Each time, I got involved really fast, and the person turned out to have either major issues (like alcoholism) or incompatibilities.
I want to do things differently next time, but the problem is that I've trained myself to believe that if it isn't zero to sixty, the guy is probably not into me. I've had lots of friends who have also had the "instant relationship" thing happen, so I don't see other ways of doing things.
I hear about people taking things slow, but I also hear about how a lot of times that's code for someone not being into you.
I also hear things about how, if you're female and dating a guy, you should never initiate calls or dates. My past relationships haven't been so traditional, but a friend told me I was doing it all wrong and attracting the wrong type of guy by not playing hard to get.
What's the normal pace of a healthy relationship and how true are these gender rules? How do I know if someone really likes me if they're not immediately wanting to be my boyfriend? And, should I date more than one guy at once? If so, how many and how often?
I'm 34, female, and have been in three serious, long-term relationships (lasting 3-7 years each with hardly any time between them).
I know I have a pattern. Each time, I got involved really fast, and the person turned out to have either major issues (like alcoholism) or incompatibilities.
I want to do things differently next time, but the problem is that I've trained myself to believe that if it isn't zero to sixty, the guy is probably not into me. I've had lots of friends who have also had the "instant relationship" thing happen, so I don't see other ways of doing things.
I hear about people taking things slow, but I also hear about how a lot of times that's code for someone not being into you.
I also hear things about how, if you're female and dating a guy, you should never initiate calls or dates. My past relationships haven't been so traditional, but a friend told me I was doing it all wrong and attracting the wrong type of guy by not playing hard to get.
What's the normal pace of a healthy relationship and how true are these gender rules? How do I know if someone really likes me if they're not immediately wanting to be my boyfriend? And, should I date more than one guy at once? If so, how many and how often?
Asking what normal dating expectations are is on par with asking what a normal person likes... it is entirely dependent on the person involved.
It makes sense to wait until you know a person well to get deeply invested, but don't talk yourself out of enjoying the experience. You'll know a guy likes you if he continues to try to get to know you. Date as many men at a time as YOU would like, don't base that decision on what you think will land you the 'best' relationship.
If you're not being yourself in the dating experience, you're going to end up with someone who is not well suited to who you really are.
posted by Nickel Pickle at 4:52 PM on April 9, 2011 [2 favorites]
It makes sense to wait until you know a person well to get deeply invested, but don't talk yourself out of enjoying the experience. You'll know a guy likes you if he continues to try to get to know you. Date as many men at a time as YOU would like, don't base that decision on what you think will land you the 'best' relationship.
If you're not being yourself in the dating experience, you're going to end up with someone who is not well suited to who you really are.
posted by Nickel Pickle at 4:52 PM on April 9, 2011 [2 favorites]
There's no such thing as normal.
posted by mleigh at 4:53 PM on April 9, 2011 [7 favorites]
posted by mleigh at 4:53 PM on April 9, 2011 [7 favorites]
How do I know if someone really likes me if they're not immediately wanting to be my boyfriend? And, should I date more than one guy at once?
As to the former, well how do you know that you want to be their girlfriend? Does that happen right away? If you're talking about someone who is otherwise a total stranger, it's entirely reasonable to believe that you won't actually know whether or not you're attracted to someone until you've been around them for at least a few dozen hours. Unless you're doing two or three days a week, this can easily take a month.
As to the latter, if by "more than one guy at once" you mean "casually going out for coffee", yeah, sure. If there isn't any indication of exclusivity, explicit or implied, there shouldn't be any expectation to that effect. If you're making out with someone, it's probably time to have that conversation, but short of that, I think it's pretty normal to "date," i.e. hang out with, a variety of people.
Wouldn't suggest dating more than one guy in the same hour, though.
posted by valkyryn at 4:54 PM on April 9, 2011
As to the former, well how do you know that you want to be their girlfriend? Does that happen right away? If you're talking about someone who is otherwise a total stranger, it's entirely reasonable to believe that you won't actually know whether or not you're attracted to someone until you've been around them for at least a few dozen hours. Unless you're doing two or three days a week, this can easily take a month.
As to the latter, if by "more than one guy at once" you mean "casually going out for coffee", yeah, sure. If there isn't any indication of exclusivity, explicit or implied, there shouldn't be any expectation to that effect. If you're making out with someone, it's probably time to have that conversation, but short of that, I think it's pretty normal to "date," i.e. hang out with, a variety of people.
Wouldn't suggest dating more than one guy in the same hour, though.
posted by valkyryn at 4:54 PM on April 9, 2011
Reality is, there are no rules. Though it is true that statistically, if you make a man wait for sex, he's more likely to see you as long term relationship material. But as with anything else statistical, YMMV. And even if you do wait, it may not work out anyway (At least one of the authors of The Rules is now divorced).
The other reality is that you can't really control whether or not you fall hard for someone. That's biology and so all this stuff about waiting till you meet someone who checks off all the boxes is unrealistic and silly. Of course, you can find someone who doesn't annoy you and checks off all the boxes and possibly eventually fall for him—but I have never met anyone who can voluntarily choose to be madly in love with someone or not in love with them. It's just not the way it works.
So, try to take care of yourself and not get immediately attached —waiting to have sex can help with this— but realize that this may not be possible. You have much more of a choice, however, about whether you stay with inappropriate people—that's where I think the real issue lies.
posted by Maias at 4:54 PM on April 9, 2011 [3 favorites]
The other reality is that you can't really control whether or not you fall hard for someone. That's biology and so all this stuff about waiting till you meet someone who checks off all the boxes is unrealistic and silly. Of course, you can find someone who doesn't annoy you and checks off all the boxes and possibly eventually fall for him—but I have never met anyone who can voluntarily choose to be madly in love with someone or not in love with them. It's just not the way it works.
So, try to take care of yourself and not get immediately attached —waiting to have sex can help with this— but realize that this may not be possible. You have much more of a choice, however, about whether you stay with inappropriate people—that's where I think the real issue lies.
posted by Maias at 4:54 PM on April 9, 2011 [3 favorites]
I think a lot of people would be assisted by recognizing all this back and forth about "take it slow," "don't be the aggressor," "wait 2 days between calls", etc., is really a matter of each person's strategy to find out how much the other person likes them before putting themselves on the line. Once you recognize that, you can allow yourself to give a little and get a little, rather than perceiving it as some sort of matrix of hard-and-fast rules where as soon as someone fucks up, they are ejected from the "dating" vehicle onto the side of the road. So whatever your friends tell you about these various rules, just keep in mind it's a mixed bag and not everyone agrees on any particular set of rules in the first place.
In your situation, you might be helped by learning to live with ambiguity. If a guy isn't begging you to move in by date #3, maybe he doesn't like you. It's true that's a possibility. But maybe it just means he doesn't like you that much yet. Maybe he is still trying to figure you out. Maybe he's got some jerk friend who told him to "play it cool" and make the girl do all the work, but he's had it just about up to here with the results of that "strategy," and he's ready to break down and just quit playing games.
You can't necessarily figure out which one it is after 2 dates, or 3, or 4, etc. Keep calling, keep going out with the guy, as long as he's willing to call you back and see you again. Then keep track of how you feel about all this, and gossip like mad with all your friends, and get their advice every step of the way. You'll figure it out eventually.
posted by rkent at 4:58 PM on April 9, 2011 [9 favorites]
In your situation, you might be helped by learning to live with ambiguity. If a guy isn't begging you to move in by date #3, maybe he doesn't like you. It's true that's a possibility. But maybe it just means he doesn't like you that much yet. Maybe he is still trying to figure you out. Maybe he's got some jerk friend who told him to "play it cool" and make the girl do all the work, but he's had it just about up to here with the results of that "strategy," and he's ready to break down and just quit playing games.
You can't necessarily figure out which one it is after 2 dates, or 3, or 4, etc. Keep calling, keep going out with the guy, as long as he's willing to call you back and see you again. Then keep track of how you feel about all this, and gossip like mad with all your friends, and get their advice every step of the way. You'll figure it out eventually.
posted by rkent at 4:58 PM on April 9, 2011 [9 favorites]
I also hear things about how, if you're female and dating a guy, you should never initiate calls or dates. ... a friend told me I was doing it all wrong and attracting the wrong type of guy by not playing hard to get.
Speaking as a single, heterosexual man just a couple years younger than yourself, I would encourage you to shove this notion out of the airlock. Could be that I'm the "wrong type of guy" (not sure what that means) or whatever but to me, when a woman initiates dates, takes an active role in our relationship and generally pursues what she wants in life unabashedly - and makes clear that I'm included in what she wants out of life, it's - how to put this? It's completely fucking awesome. In contrast to a partner who perpetually defers to me, who never suggests plans, who puts all the responsibility and control of what our relationship will be about into my hands 100% of the time, it's just no contest - partnership with a passive partner doesn't feel like partnership at all. It can make a fella wonder if his gal is truly enjoying herself and their connection if he's the one who has to initiate everything. If she's digging what we're doing, why isn't she taking more of an interest in the things we might do? It doesn't feel "old fashioned" so much as it feels bizarre and obsolete.
And in contrast to a woman who plays "hard to get" professionally and pushes the coquette thing too hard, it is, again, no contest. A woman actively pursuing a relationship sends us the signal that she ain't for games, that she's not the type to let us twist in the winds of ambiguity - that joy will probably outstrip frustration for us. Which isn't to say that a little game-playing ain't fun, but it can get tiresome and frustrating with a quickness. I personally like a woman makes herself clear worlds more than a woman who makes me wonder all the time. Most folks got plenty of aggravation in their lives and don't need any added. The women I'm interested in dating are the ones that are more fun and interesting than aggravating and confusing. I'm not saying you oughta launch yourself at every guy that interests you immediately, but I don't understand the point of playing hard to get just for the sake of playing it. If people want each other, they oughta have each other.
Again, just one data point from one guy. YMMV.
posted by EatTheWeek at 5:13 PM on April 9, 2011 [41 favorites]
Speaking as a single, heterosexual man just a couple years younger than yourself, I would encourage you to shove this notion out of the airlock. Could be that I'm the "wrong type of guy" (not sure what that means) or whatever but to me, when a woman initiates dates, takes an active role in our relationship and generally pursues what she wants in life unabashedly - and makes clear that I'm included in what she wants out of life, it's - how to put this? It's completely fucking awesome. In contrast to a partner who perpetually defers to me, who never suggests plans, who puts all the responsibility and control of what our relationship will be about into my hands 100% of the time, it's just no contest - partnership with a passive partner doesn't feel like partnership at all. It can make a fella wonder if his gal is truly enjoying herself and their connection if he's the one who has to initiate everything. If she's digging what we're doing, why isn't she taking more of an interest in the things we might do? It doesn't feel "old fashioned" so much as it feels bizarre and obsolete.
And in contrast to a woman who plays "hard to get" professionally and pushes the coquette thing too hard, it is, again, no contest. A woman actively pursuing a relationship sends us the signal that she ain't for games, that she's not the type to let us twist in the winds of ambiguity - that joy will probably outstrip frustration for us. Which isn't to say that a little game-playing ain't fun, but it can get tiresome and frustrating with a quickness. I personally like a woman makes herself clear worlds more than a woman who makes me wonder all the time. Most folks got plenty of aggravation in their lives and don't need any added. The women I'm interested in dating are the ones that are more fun and interesting than aggravating and confusing. I'm not saying you oughta launch yourself at every guy that interests you immediately, but I don't understand the point of playing hard to get just for the sake of playing it. If people want each other, they oughta have each other.
Again, just one data point from one guy. YMMV.
posted by EatTheWeek at 5:13 PM on April 9, 2011 [41 favorites]
I also hear about how a lot of times that's code for someone not being into you.
Rule of thumb: If you're talking in codes with each other instead of just talking, then you're probably already off to a bad start.
posted by hermitosis at 5:17 PM on April 9, 2011 [7 favorites]
Rule of thumb: If you're talking in codes with each other instead of just talking, then you're probably already off to a bad start.
posted by hermitosis at 5:17 PM on April 9, 2011 [7 favorites]
I agree with what Hal_c_on said.
It's been a long time since I was "dating" (and in NZ and Australia maybe we don't do that in the same way Americans do). But the main reason I used to take it more slowly than it sounds like you do, is that there were things I absolutely wanted to know about the person before doing certain things with them. E.g. before sleeping with them, I wanted to know their sexual history, whether they got tested for STDs and how recently. (And maybe ask them to get tested depending on what the answers to that were.) Those are embarrassing questions when you only just met someone. So I would delay sleeping with them until I wasn't embarrassed to ask, which usually took a while.
Before considering them as long term relationship material I wanted to know about exes - how many, how recently, why did they break up? I wanted to know about their relationship with their family. Preferably meet their family. I wanted to know how they were with money, what their political and religious attitudes were. What they think about gender roles. These aren't small talk conversation topics that come up in the first week or two of dating. But if you do know these answers, you are likely to know whether that person is going to be trouble in a relationship with you.
Obviously you can't keep your heart from doing whatever it does just because your brain hasn't been given the right answers. But you can avoid making promises to the other person, even implicitly (like talking about what you might be doing together at Christmas, or a holiday you might take together next year). That makes it easier to disentangle yourself if you discover they are bad news.
posted by lollusc at 6:12 PM on April 9, 2011 [6 favorites]
It's been a long time since I was "dating" (and in NZ and Australia maybe we don't do that in the same way Americans do). But the main reason I used to take it more slowly than it sounds like you do, is that there were things I absolutely wanted to know about the person before doing certain things with them. E.g. before sleeping with them, I wanted to know their sexual history, whether they got tested for STDs and how recently. (And maybe ask them to get tested depending on what the answers to that were.) Those are embarrassing questions when you only just met someone. So I would delay sleeping with them until I wasn't embarrassed to ask, which usually took a while.
Before considering them as long term relationship material I wanted to know about exes - how many, how recently, why did they break up? I wanted to know about their relationship with their family. Preferably meet their family. I wanted to know how they were with money, what their political and religious attitudes were. What they think about gender roles. These aren't small talk conversation topics that come up in the first week or two of dating. But if you do know these answers, you are likely to know whether that person is going to be trouble in a relationship with you.
Obviously you can't keep your heart from doing whatever it does just because your brain hasn't been given the right answers. But you can avoid making promises to the other person, even implicitly (like talking about what you might be doing together at Christmas, or a holiday you might take together next year). That makes it easier to disentangle yourself if you discover they are bad news.
posted by lollusc at 6:12 PM on April 9, 2011 [6 favorites]
I want to do things differently next time, but the problem is that I've trained myself to believe that if it isn't zero to sixty, the guy is probably not into me.
What does "zero to sixty" look like for you? Is it about getting physically intimate really early? Or moving in together soon? Or something else? Without assuming I know what you mean by "zero to sixty", maybe you could reconceptualize it to be about getting mentally and emotionally intimate first — getting to where you're comfortable having in-depth conversations about what's important to each of you (and thus where you might have irreconcilable incompatibilities), what your pasts include (which gives an opportunity to discuss alcoholism or other dependency issues), that kind of thing.
posted by Lexica at 6:12 PM on April 9, 2011
What does "zero to sixty" look like for you? Is it about getting physically intimate really early? Or moving in together soon? Or something else? Without assuming I know what you mean by "zero to sixty", maybe you could reconceptualize it to be about getting mentally and emotionally intimate first — getting to where you're comfortable having in-depth conversations about what's important to each of you (and thus where you might have irreconcilable incompatibilities), what your pasts include (which gives an opportunity to discuss alcoholism or other dependency issues), that kind of thing.
posted by Lexica at 6:12 PM on April 9, 2011
Whatever pace you're moving at now, slow it down by 3 times, at least. So if you're use to having sex on the first date, wait until the 3rd date. What do you do for the first 2 dates? You go out somewhere, in a crowd, say a fair, or museum or concert or something local happening in town. What do you like to do besides have sex? Well, do that with him. Share a meal together on those first dates. Talk about yourself, explain that you're trying to slow things down. Maybe give him a kiss at the end of the date, but that's it. Flirting is ok. Learn about each other and learn to savor the energy of learning about each other, especially when you're into each other.
What's the normal pace of a healthy relationship and how true are these gender rules? How do I know if someone really likes me if they're not immediately wanting to be my boyfriend? And, should I date more than one guy at once? If so, how many and how often?
There no hard and fast gender rules, but there are gender guidelines. He should be opening the door for you on that first date, be a bit of gentleman, that sort of thing. There's absolutely nothing wrong with calling a guy or initiating a date. NOTHING. If you're interested in someone, then you want to spend time with them, right? It's makes no fucking sense to sit around and see if they call you. That's game playing and you know what happens in a game, someone wins, someone loses. Dating should be about everyone winning, i.e. having a good time.
You know someone likes you if they seem interested in having a second date or third date. Interested means they either ask about having that second or say they'll call you later and do call you and have plans to do something. Anything sign of interest is that you spend hours talking. Not him talking and you listening or vice versa, but both of you actually talking about something or several somethings.
There is no hard and fast rule about dating more than one person other than being honest about it, but based on your post, I'd recommend one person at a time. You're going to be trying dating in a whole new way, so you need to focus and dating one person might help that.
Good luck!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:29 PM on April 9, 2011
What's the normal pace of a healthy relationship and how true are these gender rules? How do I know if someone really likes me if they're not immediately wanting to be my boyfriend? And, should I date more than one guy at once? If so, how many and how often?
There no hard and fast gender rules, but there are gender guidelines. He should be opening the door for you on that first date, be a bit of gentleman, that sort of thing. There's absolutely nothing wrong with calling a guy or initiating a date. NOTHING. If you're interested in someone, then you want to spend time with them, right? It's makes no fucking sense to sit around and see if they call you. That's game playing and you know what happens in a game, someone wins, someone loses. Dating should be about everyone winning, i.e. having a good time.
You know someone likes you if they seem interested in having a second date or third date. Interested means they either ask about having that second or say they'll call you later and do call you and have plans to do something. Anything sign of interest is that you spend hours talking. Not him talking and you listening or vice versa, but both of you actually talking about something or several somethings.
There is no hard and fast rule about dating more than one person other than being honest about it, but based on your post, I'd recommend one person at a time. You're going to be trying dating in a whole new way, so you need to focus and dating one person might help that.
Good luck!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:29 PM on April 9, 2011
I also hear things about how, if you're female and dating a guy, you should never initiate calls or dates
Ok, my completely 100% unscientific theory is that the idea behind this, and the 2 days in between calls rule, and all that game playing bullshit, is that people generally want what they (think they) can't have, and making yourself *too* available can make you seem less attractive.
So here's how you work that without playing games: keep busy, and be interesting and engaging. This has the added bonus of also being attractive to most people, and increasing your quality of life. Win!
Example: What sounds better?
Him: Hey, uh, so not sure when I'll see you next...
Overly Available You: Any time! Really. Just call me.
Coquetteish Game-Playing You: Hmm, I don't knoooow... tee hee!
Confident You: Well, I've got my friend's gallery opening on Friday and I'm taking a waterskiing lesson on Saturday afternoon - but I could do drinks Saturday night?
Most people would take door #3.
Keeping busy* also lessens the chance of going from zero to sixty right away because you just have other stuff going on. Hopefully that also translates into you having less of a tolerance for sketchiness from people you're dating. I think hal_c_on's advice above to make sure you know some certain vital facts about a person before getting too involved is a good way to keep that in check.
On a similar tack, since you say you have a pattern of going for people who turn out to be ultimately incompatible, you might want to be open-minded about who you date. I hear your story a lot from friends who go for what I call the feature sheet (e.g., what job they have, what music they listen to, what hobbies or sports they like, what they look like) as opposed to their quality (e.g., how they communicate, what their values are, who is important to them, what are their life goals and how driven are they to achieve them). Focus less on the feature sheet if that's what you've been doing. You will find quality across a surprisingly broad range, so cast a wide net but be picky about what (who?) you bring in.
As far as dating other people? If there are other people you'd like to date, then sure, go for it. Don't date just to reach some arbitrary number - but if more than one person who interests you crosses your path, you've got much to gain by seeing what they're all about. Just be upfront about exclusivity or lack thereof if you're dating for any length of time, because that's the decent thing to do.
It's a good thing that you're identifying a pattern and taking steps to change it. Good luck!
*for advice on how to do this, see all the AskMes about how to make friends, what new hobby to take up, what to do in [your city or city like yours]... or just make a list of things you've always wanted to do and get on it.
posted by AV at 6:37 PM on April 9, 2011 [16 favorites]
Ok, my completely 100% unscientific theory is that the idea behind this, and the 2 days in between calls rule, and all that game playing bullshit, is that people generally want what they (think they) can't have, and making yourself *too* available can make you seem less attractive.
So here's how you work that without playing games: keep busy, and be interesting and engaging. This has the added bonus of also being attractive to most people, and increasing your quality of life. Win!
Example: What sounds better?
Him: Hey, uh, so not sure when I'll see you next...
Overly Available You: Any time! Really. Just call me.
Coquetteish Game-Playing You: Hmm, I don't knoooow... tee hee!
Confident You: Well, I've got my friend's gallery opening on Friday and I'm taking a waterskiing lesson on Saturday afternoon - but I could do drinks Saturday night?
Most people would take door #3.
Keeping busy* also lessens the chance of going from zero to sixty right away because you just have other stuff going on. Hopefully that also translates into you having less of a tolerance for sketchiness from people you're dating. I think hal_c_on's advice above to make sure you know some certain vital facts about a person before getting too involved is a good way to keep that in check.
On a similar tack, since you say you have a pattern of going for people who turn out to be ultimately incompatible, you might want to be open-minded about who you date. I hear your story a lot from friends who go for what I call the feature sheet (e.g., what job they have, what music they listen to, what hobbies or sports they like, what they look like) as opposed to their quality (e.g., how they communicate, what their values are, who is important to them, what are their life goals and how driven are they to achieve them). Focus less on the feature sheet if that's what you've been doing. You will find quality across a surprisingly broad range, so cast a wide net but be picky about what (who?) you bring in.
As far as dating other people? If there are other people you'd like to date, then sure, go for it. Don't date just to reach some arbitrary number - but if more than one person who interests you crosses your path, you've got much to gain by seeing what they're all about. Just be upfront about exclusivity or lack thereof if you're dating for any length of time, because that's the decent thing to do.
It's a good thing that you're identifying a pattern and taking steps to change it. Good luck!
*for advice on how to do this, see all the AskMes about how to make friends, what new hobby to take up, what to do in [your city or city like yours]... or just make a list of things you've always wanted to do and get on it.
posted by AV at 6:37 PM on April 9, 2011 [16 favorites]
A friend told me I was doing it all wrong and attracting the wrong type of guy by not playing hard to get.
That may work well for some guys. It may even work well for the type of guys you like. It's not how Mrs. Lurgi did it and, frankly, I was just fine with that.
There is some wisdom in that rule, however, if you typically go way too fast and blow things as a result. Waiting two days (or three or four) is not always the "right" thing to do, but it might help you in your case. I think some of the rules about not getting intimate too soon and whatnot are more about making sure that you (and not your hormones) are running things. That's worth keeping in mind.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 7:21 PM on April 9, 2011 [1 favorite]
That may work well for some guys. It may even work well for the type of guys you like. It's not how Mrs. Lurgi did it and, frankly, I was just fine with that.
There is some wisdom in that rule, however, if you typically go way too fast and blow things as a result. Waiting two days (or three or four) is not always the "right" thing to do, but it might help you in your case. I think some of the rules about not getting intimate too soon and whatnot are more about making sure that you (and not your hormones) are running things. That's worth keeping in mind.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 7:21 PM on April 9, 2011 [1 favorite]
If two people are compatible and want to be together, there is no way to "blow it" short of doing something completely crazy.
The only thing all the "hard to get" stuff can do is postpone the inevitable with someone who isn't very into you anyway. I (a man) have done it at times- the girl wasn't very into me, and I succeeded in getting a little bit of interest from her by pretending to be aloof. And then... I was stuck. I could continue pretending to be aloof, and she could continue genuinely not caring that much, and nothing would happen. Or I could finally give in and show a little more interest, thus making her lose interest completely.
posted by drjimmy11 at 9:22 PM on April 9, 2011
The only thing all the "hard to get" stuff can do is postpone the inevitable with someone who isn't very into you anyway. I (a man) have done it at times- the girl wasn't very into me, and I succeeded in getting a little bit of interest from her by pretending to be aloof. And then... I was stuck. I could continue pretending to be aloof, and she could continue genuinely not caring that much, and nothing would happen. Or I could finally give in and show a little more interest, thus making her lose interest completely.
posted by drjimmy11 at 9:22 PM on April 9, 2011
I didn't know girls are actually told they're not supposed to call. No wonder. Seriously, guys love it when you call us. We trade rumors in hushed tones about how to make it happen. I vividly remember the first time a girl actually texted me without me starting it. It felt like catching a unicorn.
posted by abcde at 10:26 PM on April 9, 2011 [14 favorites]
posted by abcde at 10:26 PM on April 9, 2011 [14 favorites]
I hear about people taking things slow, but I also hear about how a lot of times that's code for someone not being into you.
I hear about people taking things fast, but I also hear about how a lot of times that's code for someone just wanting to be in a relationship, rather in a relationship with me.
But maybe I'm far too jaded.
posted by astrochimp at 11:49 PM on April 9, 2011 [6 favorites]
I hear about people taking things fast, but I also hear about how a lot of times that's code for someone just wanting to be in a relationship, rather in a relationship with me.
But maybe I'm far too jaded.
posted by astrochimp at 11:49 PM on April 9, 2011 [6 favorites]
I think you think they won't be into you so you jump them before they can change their mind.
You are not stopping to ask if you are into them.
Give him time to prove himself. By saying it's because you're not playing hard to get you are setting up a straw man knowing every guy here will automatically beat it up. But it is the opppsite of what you're doing, which is not working.
So, try waiting for the guy to initiate the first call and the first date, after which you initiate the second call and the second date, then let it be his turn. Don't talk on the phone for more than a few
minutes so that there's something to talk about when he sees you. Don't meet more than once a week for the first minth, twice a week for the second month, three times a week for the third and so on. Don't always travel to see him because it's just as far from your place to his as vice versa; let him travel to be with you the first and then every other time.
Most importantly, while you do this, keep an eye out for dealbreaking flaws, and let him show you that he's into you rather than presuming he isn't and grabbing him quick so you can get him before he realizes that.
posted by tel3path at 2:18 AM on April 10, 2011 [3 favorites]
You are not stopping to ask if you are into them.
Give him time to prove himself. By saying it's because you're not playing hard to get you are setting up a straw man knowing every guy here will automatically beat it up. But it is the opppsite of what you're doing, which is not working.
So, try waiting for the guy to initiate the first call and the first date, after which you initiate the second call and the second date, then let it be his turn. Don't talk on the phone for more than a few
minutes so that there's something to talk about when he sees you. Don't meet more than once a week for the first minth, twice a week for the second month, three times a week for the third and so on. Don't always travel to see him because it's just as far from your place to his as vice versa; let him travel to be with you the first and then every other time.
Most importantly, while you do this, keep an eye out for dealbreaking flaws, and let him show you that he's into you rather than presuming he isn't and grabbing him quick so you can get him before he realizes that.
posted by tel3path at 2:18 AM on April 10, 2011 [3 favorites]
p.s. if playing hard to get didn't work, we wouldn't have several posts a week from distressed women whose men are doing just that. It certainly creates a powerful connection in these cases.
posted by tel3path at 4:44 AM on April 10, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by tel3path at 4:44 AM on April 10, 2011 [1 favorite]
one of the ugly bits of dating is the Rules.
The problem is that a bunch of people have noticed a pattern, and made up a bunch of rules to follow without really getting down to why the patterns exist in the first damn place.
Why should you take it slow? Because you are an awesome person with a lot to offer and the person you date should ALSO be awesome and have a lot to offer. You both need time to learn enough about the person to know that.
That being said- playing hard to get is stupid- but the pattern is still there. A person (man or woman) that is totally avalable six nights a week or one who is willing to be, just for a stranger that they JUST MET doesn't sound like someone who has a lot to offer. If you find yourself with a ton of free time and are tempted to smother someone with avalability, try taking up basket weaving. They don't want you to play a game, they just get turned off by people with no life. That's actually pretty fair, isn't it?
It's not really about them, it's about you. You see yourself as too quick to jump in, so make up some guidlines for yourself. "wow, i get infatuated with dude really quickly (before i have a good chance to know that he's not a drunken flake with the herp), maybe i should keep myself busy with other things so i can only date once or twice a week. That way i won't feel like im being game-playery and i'll have some fun, cool things to talk about when i do go out."
posted by Blisterlips at 5:28 AM on April 10, 2011 [4 favorites]
The problem is that a bunch of people have noticed a pattern, and made up a bunch of rules to follow without really getting down to why the patterns exist in the first damn place.
Why should you take it slow? Because you are an awesome person with a lot to offer and the person you date should ALSO be awesome and have a lot to offer. You both need time to learn enough about the person to know that.
That being said- playing hard to get is stupid- but the pattern is still there. A person (man or woman) that is totally avalable six nights a week or one who is willing to be, just for a stranger that they JUST MET doesn't sound like someone who has a lot to offer. If you find yourself with a ton of free time and are tempted to smother someone with avalability, try taking up basket weaving. They don't want you to play a game, they just get turned off by people with no life. That's actually pretty fair, isn't it?
It's not really about them, it's about you. You see yourself as too quick to jump in, so make up some guidlines for yourself. "wow, i get infatuated with dude really quickly (before i have a good chance to know that he's not a drunken flake with the herp), maybe i should keep myself busy with other things so i can only date once or twice a week. That way i won't feel like im being game-playery and i'll have some fun, cool things to talk about when i do go out."
posted by Blisterlips at 5:28 AM on April 10, 2011 [4 favorites]
I didn't know girls are actually told they're not supposed to call. No wonder. Seriously, guys love it when you call us. We trade rumors in hushed tones about how to make it happen. I vividly remember the first time a girl actually texted me without me starting it. It felt like catching a unicorn.
This is probably why it was "invented". Withholding affection works, up to a point. When someone always makes the other person have to work for it (whatever it is), it makes that someone the boss.
They don't want you to play a game, they just get turned off by people with no life. That's actually pretty fair, isn't it?
Whether or not this is universal, I don't know. But there seems to be a difference or some emotional confusion where "being available" meshes with "needy".
At first glance, yes, it is perfectly fair. But then when I thought about it for a minute, it occurred to me that this is only about half of it. Nobody wants to date a human puppy that follows them around all the time.
But the other half would be the people who also have no life. The sad puppies that are looking for someone's social life to glom onto. They would be turned off by the "seems too available therefore must not have a life" people because they are looking for an activities director. And then there are the people who are unwilling to give up some portion of their super fun and busy life for this other new person. They aren't interested in a relationship as much as they are interviewing people to act as midseason replacement, schedule fillers.
So my advice is: don't be needy. If you are an all-in kind of person, do it because that is who you are, and not because you *have* to have a SO. I would rather have some failures and false starts by being true to myself, than by not being me. Don't look at a relationship as a project or a puzzle that you need to complete or you fail, but as an open ended journey where two people share bits of their lives together for a while.
posted by gjc at 9:01 AM on April 10, 2011 [5 favorites]
This is probably why it was "invented". Withholding affection works, up to a point. When someone always makes the other person have to work for it (whatever it is), it makes that someone the boss.
They don't want you to play a game, they just get turned off by people with no life. That's actually pretty fair, isn't it?
Whether or not this is universal, I don't know. But there seems to be a difference or some emotional confusion where "being available" meshes with "needy".
At first glance, yes, it is perfectly fair. But then when I thought about it for a minute, it occurred to me that this is only about half of it. Nobody wants to date a human puppy that follows them around all the time.
But the other half would be the people who also have no life. The sad puppies that are looking for someone's social life to glom onto. They would be turned off by the "seems too available therefore must not have a life" people because they are looking for an activities director. And then there are the people who are unwilling to give up some portion of their super fun and busy life for this other new person. They aren't interested in a relationship as much as they are interviewing people to act as midseason replacement, schedule fillers.
So my advice is: don't be needy. If you are an all-in kind of person, do it because that is who you are, and not because you *have* to have a SO. I would rather have some failures and false starts by being true to myself, than by not being me. Don't look at a relationship as a project or a puzzle that you need to complete or you fail, but as an open ended journey where two people share bits of their lives together for a while.
posted by gjc at 9:01 AM on April 10, 2011 [5 favorites]
I recently had someone try to jump into a relationship with me really fast, and it's off-putting. I think that 'taking it slow' shows the other person that you are not going to invest all of yourself until you are certain that this person deserves it, which I think shows confidence and self respect. When my last partner wanted to commit without even really knowing me, I felt both like I was just being used as a quick fix to loneliness, and like she didn't respect herself enough to know who she was committing too. Longer answer later, but these are some initial reactions I have when someone wants to jump into things too quickly.
posted by whalebreath at 1:51 PM on April 10, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by whalebreath at 1:51 PM on April 10, 2011 [3 favorites]
An exercise that might be helpful for you is this:
This jives well with the idea of red flags and yellow flags: red flags are things that you know you simply can't tolerate (example: for a recovering alcoholic, heavy drinking would be a red flag in a partner.) Red flags are pretty straightforward, because they're obvious and in your face.
The things on the list I said to make will be yellow flags. Yellow flags are much more of a gray area-- you can tolerate a handful of yellow flags. Yellow flags are also harder to spot, because you're around them so much that you're blind to them. By doing this exercise, the hope is that you'll start to understand your yellow flags and be aware of them. From there, you can make a much more informed choice about the people you associate with.
posted by The Eponymous Pseudonymous Rex at 1:57 PM on April 10, 2011 [11 favorites]
- Make a list of your 3 most recent serious relationships (a mix of your close friends and your romantic partners is good), and your parents (or other important adults from childhood.)
- For each of these people write down 5 things that are bad or that you don't like about them.
- Now look for commonalities amongst these lists.
This jives well with the idea of red flags and yellow flags: red flags are things that you know you simply can't tolerate (example: for a recovering alcoholic, heavy drinking would be a red flag in a partner.) Red flags are pretty straightforward, because they're obvious and in your face.
The things on the list I said to make will be yellow flags. Yellow flags are much more of a gray area-- you can tolerate a handful of yellow flags. Yellow flags are also harder to spot, because you're around them so much that you're blind to them. By doing this exercise, the hope is that you'll start to understand your yellow flags and be aware of them. From there, you can make a much more informed choice about the people you associate with.
posted by The Eponymous Pseudonymous Rex at 1:57 PM on April 10, 2011 [11 favorites]
I should note that red flags and yellow flags are personal, and not meant to be judgmental. For example, I think everyone (over a certain age, I guess) should be allowed to smoke marijuana, and think it should be legalized. But for me, smoking pot is a yellow flag, because I know that it's hard for me not to smoke pot when I'm around other pot smokers, and I don't want to smoke pot. Of course I have friends who are pot smokers and enjoy their company, but I am better prepared to deal with their behavior by being aware that it's a yellow flag.
posted by The Eponymous Pseudonymous Rex at 2:03 PM on April 10, 2011
posted by The Eponymous Pseudonymous Rex at 2:03 PM on April 10, 2011
This thread is closed to new comments.
Is the "right kind of guy," who is presumably turned off by your non-adherence to 1950s dating rules, a misogynistic old man?
posted by you're a kitty! at 4:32 PM on April 9, 2011 [7 favorites]