He's just not that into you!

Wow, a great episode of Oprah that made me think immediately of several threads here and how this could have helped a lot of people that were looking for advice. Had I seen this, I would have given much different advice to certain people.

The idea for the book sprouted from an episode of 'Sex and the City" and was written by a couple of the shows writers. The episode was inspired by a real conversation that Greg Behrendt had with a female co-worker.

Here's a link to the show on what men are really thinking when they don't call, say they want to be friends or are just "too busy". What it really means, no matter what excuses you make for him, is that he's just not that into you!

http://www.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/200409/tows_past_20040922.jhtml

And some pearls of wisdom from the book.....

http://www.oprah.com/tows/booksseen/200409/tows_book_20040922_behrendttruccillo.jhtml

Edit Your Dating Vocabulary

In their new book, He's Just Not That Into You, Greg and Liz have written a set of new dating standards for women. They want women to raise the bar for themselves.

Standard-Raising Suggestions
I will not go out with a man who:
(a) Keeps me waiting by the phone
(b) Is not sure he wants to date me
(c) Makes me feel sexually undesirable
(d) Drinks or does drugs to an extent that makes me uncomfortable
(e) Fears talking about our future
(f) Is married

I will not, under any circumstances, spend my precious time with a man who has already rejected me or who is not clearly a good, kind, loving person.

Liberating Vocabulary
Friend: A person who is your pal. What it generally means in relationships is he's just not that into you.

Busy: Busy means I'm the President of the United States. I'm an astronaut and I'm on another planet. I'm in a really successful band. What it means in relationships is, yeah, I'm just not that into you.

Bad boy: A bad boy is just a bad boy. Stay away. If you're dating somebody that's a bad boy, that's just your fault. If you say "my boyfriend's kind of a bad boy," I feel bad for you. If you say, "I like bad boys" well, then I don't feel bad for you. If you say, "I like things that don't work." Okay, good for you. Generally, guys with low self-esteem aren't worth the trouble. They're just not.

The Dog Pound
Question: So how do you screen for dogs? Answer: You just don't let him be a dog. Your standards are so high you don't let him be a dog. You can't be played if you're not playing. What I want to say that is so key for everybody to get. Nobody—even if a dog has been a dog. He has been head of the pound. Head of the dog pound. If he meets the right person, he will change his dog pound ways. He just will.

Question: How can I tell if he thinks I'm worth it? Answer: If the guy thinks you're worth it, he will do whatever is necessary if he thinks you're worth it. All the guys are nodding. Because he raised the bar and he wants to raise the bar to meet you where you are, if he thinks you're worth it. If he doesn't, then he doesn't. He's just not that into you. And you—we all—should have another standard.


Another thing he said was that if a guy really thinks you're worth it, it doesn't matter if he's the president of the company, he'll never be too busy to take your call. And speaking of calling, he will call you when he says he will call - not a day or two later - and there will be no excuses. When a guy is into you, he wants to be with you and will make every effort to do so. (The men in the audience completely agreed with this.)

He also explained the confusion of the guy who seems like he's into you, but doesn't call often or follow through. Basically, he's really not that into you, but he probably doesn't have anything better going! And he explained crazy comments like, "I love you, but I'm not in love with you." That means, "I don't love you but I don't want to hurt you." Or the whole "not ready for marriage" thing. Interesting viewpoint to take when the relationships were even 2, 3 & 4 years along!

Wow, a ton of great info and completely believable. Even though I'm not "out there" right now, I think I might get the book just for some interesting reading!

Originally posted by Jlojsuperman
And Im sure some guys wont like that 'trade secrets' are being told. lol I myself dont mind I think its awesome that women are being told these things.

Too true, Jerry. I think it's great for women to see this and stop fooling ourselves. And I should think that guys would want women to know what is going on because that would save men from having to make stupid excuses!

While this type of advice is (or better said, should be) gold, so often people *do not* want to hear it.

Peace,
thatgirl

I know that we women are not the best at expressing our needs to our guys. Remember that thread recently that went something like, "How are you?" "Fine". Well, "fine" could mean several things. And these guys say to us women that they are not mind-readers and that they want us to tell them in clear terms what we want.

Well, this thread just made me realize that this issue of obfuscation (being deliberately vague) is not completely owned by the female gender. In other words, MEN DO THIS TOO!

So, guys next time that you feel that we women are the only ones that do this, come back to this thread. It's true that people of both genders can tend to beat around the bush.

Why not save everyone time and simply just tell it like it is?

*easy for me to say... I'm a very blunt Taurus :p *

It was a great show, every woman in the country should have seen it. I myself was raised with alot of guys, so knew most of the trade secrets...

Thatgirl is right, If people don't want to hear it, then you know what, you get what you deserve, we claim to be these all knowing, wiser ow, but most times we act no different then the younger ones, its just that the ym don't have enough life experiences to know the difference. And boy, do we women make excuses about men, not matter what our age.

but alot of truth was said on Oprah's show...it doesn't matter whether we're divorce or single...we women don't want to read the signs that are out there...the author of the book said that women tend to go back to their females friends and over analyze every single word he said and their friends don't exactly come clean and tell them the truth because we don't want to hurt our friend (I know, my friends and I used to do this alot, one friend in particular didn't want hear that a guy she like for 7 years was not into her, and turn around and married someone else).

hopefully, this show will help everyone to not waste time, to be in a relationship with a guy for 4 years and you want to get married and he does someday but feels there's so much he wants to do before then, someone needed to tell that boy, that he could do it together with his wife (or he's not that into you)...that's a waste of time.

Paris

Thanks for posting this Kristin! I think that a lot of this stuff can apply for men too. There are times I see ym come here with similar woes regarding women they have fallen for. I'm copying your post, and putting in in my journal. Great reminders that both men and women need. Thank you! :)

women tend to go back to their females friends and over analyze every single word he said and their friends don't exactly come clean and tell them the truth because we don't want to hurt our friend I have seen us doing this MANY times, here at ageless too. We tell the woman to yes... call him... have a conversation. And this is when he hasn't called her in 10 days! There is NO relationship.

I just hate it when a guy is being unavailable and we think WE SHOULD CALL THEM, and they will open up and say "Oh you hurt my feelings by not ordering the same item as me". Then all is forgiven..etc. etc.

My mantra is, if a guy doesn't put as much energy into the relationship as I do, then one of us is not necessary... and that is him! :cool:

Originally posted by whiterose

Why not save everyone time and simply just tell it like it is?


Short answer: Because most people don't like confrontation and so they chicken out.

Me, I'm more the "rip off the Band-Aid and get it over with" type, but there are lots of people who think, "Well, if I just lift off the edge carefully, maybe it won't...OW! THAT HURT! Hrm, better lift it off slower next time." :rolleyes:

Originally posted by ScarletHawke
Short answer: Because most people don't like confrontation and so they chicken out.


That is exactly what the other men on the show said, too! Basically, they don't want to be the bad guy, they don't want to hurt someone's feelings and - horrors! - what if the tears start flowing??? (I know that's one thing that guys absolutely can't seem to deal with and one of the "big guns" that some women whip out in desparation - the tears.)

Genevieve - I totally agree about YM going thru the same. I think women don't want to be "mean" either. There's even a very recent thread where Peachy & I said basically the same thing - maybe she's just not that into you. The hard part with that here is the fact that a lot of OW may actually be into him, but just can't get past the AG or just don't think the YM is really serious. I know that was the case for Jeremy & I and if Jeremy hadn't been persistant and had taken the first several "No's" for face value, we wouldn't be together today! So I think it's a little more difficult to apply this to OW maybe?

Originally posted by Kristin
That is exactly what the other men on the show said, too! Basically, they don't want to be the bad guy, they don't want to hurt someone's feelings and - horrors! - what if the tears start flowing???

That first bit about not wanting to be the bad guy -- that's not exactly accurate. The guy doesn't really care about her anyway, so it's not about him wanting to spare her feelings -- it's about not wanting to be blamed. Avoiding confrontation also includes not wanting to have to confront himself about whatever unkind behaviour he might have been perpetuating for months... or years...

If that's the case, he'll avoid that poor woman like the plague, because she's a constant reminder to him of what a great guy he's not.

And sadly, she gets caught up in this elaborate web of a guy trying to run away from himself. Which means, it's going nowhere fast. Stop, drop, roll and get the hell out. ;)

I caught part of this show and thought it was great. I think the author was amazingly plugged into how women should learn to respect themselves and demand the highest for themselves. That's a message we all need to hear at some point.

On the other hand, this guy, by his own admission, is not a psychologist, or an expert in the field of interpersonal dynamics. He does give a lot of insight into the male mind. I don't think there are hard and fast rules that apply in all situations however. If I had lived by the one about never accepting back a man who had rejected me, I wouldn't be in the relationship I'm in today. At one point I rejected him as well. But our rejection of each other was as romantic partners. We never rejected each other as friends....that always remained a constant. He is a kind and loving person (and so am I) and I think we both valued that about each other. Ultimately we landed back in each other's arms with the romance rekindled and burning even more brightly.

Point being, there are always exceptions to every "rule!"

hmmm....

I think Greg's take on it would be that back then, he just really wasn't that into you (or you him for that matter) but time went by, you experience life and realize that in your youthful ignorance, you passed up something really good (now that you have something to compare it to). You hooked back up and now you are really into each other! ;)

(Also, I think he meant "rejected" in a different way. Not people who decide that they're not for each other, I think he meant keep taking back a guy who keeps dumping you or cheating on you. I know a lot of women that do that and they keep getting hurt over and over again.)

Well....

To some degree, though, we aren't just talking about cheaters and abusers (no disagreement there :) ) - we're also talking about guys who aren't taking the communications initiative or seemingly "trying hard enough" and I think Katemeup's point is well-taken.

Sometimes it does take a period of time for partners to come together or to come back together after a break and there are occaisions where the seeming lack of enthusiasm can be about other things than "he's just not into you".

Although it sure can mean that, too.

I guess I don't really have a point except to agree that for every rule, there's an exception and a sigh to the notion that pop psychology can ever encompass the full complexity of human relationships.

I agree that you can never say "always". All situations are different. But (my take on it) this is aimed directly at certain behavior that most women can admit to at one time or another in the event that they have had a guy that was behaving this way early in the "relationship"

I think the spirit of the book is about the behavior seen after the first date or two, not established & proven relationships.

The TV episode that inspired the book had a character, after one date, asking her friends why they thought that he hadn't called yet. They were all making excuses like he must be busy or maybe he's not ready for a relationship, etc. Carrie turned to her boyfriend and said, "What do you think?" and he said, "Honestly? I think that he's just really not that into you."

Greg's point was that we get these signs that the guy isn't into us but we choose to ignore them and make excuses. It's hard to accept that someone just isn't into you - especially when you are into them. Then we drag it out until we finally see that this guy is just not going to be who we want and it hurts even more after so much time.

The examples that went on for years were not in the majority at all and were special situations.

I take the point Kristin makes that this applies only at the start of a relationship because otherwise it just reinforces all the stereotypes and we can't just say all men do this and all women do that. I know lots of women who have kept guys hanging and lots of guys who have been very into their partners but have a problem with communicating as often as a lot of women tend to like.

However, as anyone who has read my previous posts will know, I am guilty of acting like a desperate woman waiting for the phone to ring BUT it didn't mean in my case that my guy just wasn't that into me - far from it! It did mean that he was too insecure to let me know how much he cared - and I had kept him watching the phone too for the same reason!

It's very easy to generalise but every situation is different and I just think we need to be careful. At the same time I think the advice here is excellent and has helped me a lot! But the good thing about it is the variety of responses which help you to see things the way they really are, as you are the one person who really knows.

I saw that "Sex in the City" Episode. Love that show, I can always relate to what they go through. I was into someone who was not into me. Sure after the date he was hi on it all and called right away, but within days that wore off and he became distant. Non responsive to IMs and always with the excuses why we couldn't get together again. So I tested the waters and pushed a little harder and got my "Dear Jane" letter to confirm my suspicions. Is it ok to give them a shove to really make sure they have cooled on you? It's hard to just give up the hope that his dog ate your number or his phone dialing finger got sprained or any number of wacky reasons. We have nothing to lose, right?:rolleyes:

What's interesting to me is that I see these same behaviors in women when I'm showing interest. Thanks for posting, this has certainly been informitive even for a guy! LOL

That brings up a point - I'd love to hear some honest opinions from the guys here. Does this sound like you at one time or another with a woman that you just weren't really that into???

And how many women here can stand up and say, "Guilty!" :o We've all heard the old cliche, "I have to wash my hair tonight." or "Let's be friends." so I know that women do this too!

Why does it seem that women make excuses more for the guys and hang on longer, though?
:confused:

I think a small point needs to be made here about timing though. Sometimes you or the other person are just not ready for anything. I think the bottom line is that we are all deserving of someone who is physically, mentally, and emotionally available to us. We deserve no less, and should accept no less if that is what we want, and if we are also willing to give it. We also have to ask ourselves if WE are indeed physically, mentally, and emotionally available. If not.. then we are just not ready, and need to let the other person know. Timing does have some part, I believe.

For my own reference:
"I will not go out with a man/woman who:
(a) Keeps me waiting by the phone
(b) Is not sure he wants to date me
(c) Makes me feel sexually undesirable
(d) Drinks or does drugs to an extent that makes me uncomfortable
(e) Fears talking about our future
(f) Is married"

I'm guilty of not being clear about my feelings once since my divorce and I would never do that again. Now, if it's not working, I come right out and say it. No sense dragging out the inevitable.

On the other side of the coin, I have experienced A, B, C and F with women.

F, I didn't find out until after 2 months of the best relationship of my life when I was much younger.

A and B since getting divorced and there are ways to deal with them. For example, I go out on a date, not sure if she likes me or will call. Next day I will write/call and say "Thanks for a wonderful time, please get hold of me if you'd like to talk further." They either write back or not. If not, move on. Easier said than done sometimes. If I'm not interested I just say that I didn't feel a connection. It's rare I give up that quick though.

C, well my ex did that, so, one of the reasons I'm divorced.

If I had someone to call, I would call her http://www.agelesslove.com/boards/images/icons/icon7.gif

http://www.toyota-valais.ch/2003/contact/images/telephone.jpg

You can call me MS683 but you have to promise to giggle like Elmo! :p

Originally posted by Genevieve
You can call me MS683 but you have to promise to giggle like Elmo! :p

lol http://www.agelesslove.com/boards/images/icons/icon7.gif

Originally posted by ToGirl
Is it ok to give them a shove to really make sure they have cooled on you? It's hard to just give up the hope that his dog ate your number or his phone dialing finger got sprained or any number of wacky reasons. We have nothing to lose, right?:rolleyes:

Except your pride.

I have been guilty of hanging on a bit longer than I should, and having my hopes raised by the other person. This has happened more than once. I've learned to pay attention not to just words, but deeds as well. It boils down to saying what you mean , and meaning what you say. So perhaps in an effort not to hurt anyone's feelings, you are given false hope.. it's not always our fault for hanging on a bit.. sometimes we are lead to believe certain things.. but time does tell, and so do his actions, which often speak louder than words. I usually know when it's time to let go though, and will do so. Hard as that is sometimes.

Originally posted by Genevieve
I... I've learned to pay attention not to just words, but deeds as well. It boils down to saying what you mean , and meaning what you say. ..

Well, that's one lesson I have learned too, and I hope - and think - I have learned it well.

I think that was the only time I tried to hang on longer to a "relationship" than I should have ... - actually, relationship is not even a fitting word, it was more like intensely dating for 3-4 months ... and his actions didn't match up to his words, but whenever I called him up on that and made the move to finish it, he did EVERYTHING to make sure I gave him one more chance - just to have him turn round at the end of the 4 month and send me packing :p

Taught me to trust my feelings when actions and words don't match, but hey, I was young, so .... ;)

So, bottomline, I totally agree: if a guy (or a gal) doesn't move the world to be with you, it's a no-brainer imo. Might still be interesting for company, but nothing one should get fooled about with big words .... :)

Well, folks, I hate to say I told ya so, but it seems some people have stolen my thoughts and put them into a new dating book called, "He Just Isn't That Into You". I forget the author's names, but it's written by a man and a woman, and I heard them interviewed on the radio this morning. They said everything I've always said...LET THE MAN PURSUE YOU! No matter how young or shy he is, he will step up if he's really interested. Can you give him a little hint that you're interested in perhaps getting to know him? Yes, but don't do any more than that. Men do not like aggressive women who pursue them.

So, if you're out there wondering about a ym and if he's into you, go buy this book. It'll save you a lot of heartache, dignity, and possibly making a fool of yourself. Ym are shy, they are not all that experienced when it comes to asking women out, especially not older women, but if he's into you, he'll find a way. If he's not that interested, he may allow some pursuit on your part, but he'll tire of it and start pursuing someone else at some point. Someone who wasn't as available. For all of you sitting by the phone waiting for him to call...DON'T! This book talks about "newly found time". Get some and use it! Do ANYTHING other than sit by the phone or wait on the computer for him to IM you or e-mail you.

Call your friends, go shopping, go out to eat, catch a movie, clean out your closet, play with your dog or your kids, go to the gym, teach yourself a new recipe, wash your car, get a new hobby, read a book...DON'T CALL HIM. Don't return every single one of his phone calls. Wait a day or two, unless he's trying to pin down a day/time for a date.

When I saw Robin in a bar, I thought he was cute and wanted to meet him, but I knew going up and introducing myself would be deadly, so I told a mutual friend who knew him and that person went up to him and told him I'd like to meet him. The ball was then in his court. He could have said, "No, tell her I'm just not into meeting people right now." As luck would have it, he looked at me and said, "Sure, tell her I'll be right over to talk to her." When he did come over to talk to me, I didn't make it all about me. I asked him a lot about himself, and really listened to the answers.

We began dating. He didn't call every day, but he did call at least every other day, and left messages which I didn't always return even though I really wanted to. When I called him back, he'd say, "I like it that you've got a life and other things to do, and that you're not just sitting there waiting for me. I think that's cool.":) That's how MOST men feel...they think it's creepy when a woman pines away for them. She just reeks of desperation. They don't want to be responsible for your happiness or connection to the outside world. You have to do that for yourself.

A man who doesn't call you just isn't that interested. Don't dwell on him, or why he doesn't want you. There's nothing wrong with you. There's nothing wrong with him. It's just the way it is, and it just doesn't matter. Move on, don't waste time. The man who wants you is just around the corner.

Good luck to all of you in the dating arena. Put yourself first, love yourself first (don't forget to do that) and worthy men will be drawn to your positivity.

lol

i swear polly, my OW must have read this book lol

she's let me do all the chasing, instigating . . . and you're right, i'm nervous enough about the whole thing, i'd probably get cold feet if she had pursued me . . . it's probably a loss of control thing, not so much that i need to feel in control, more so that I'd feel spun out and disorented, not knowing where i was going . . . or even being manipulated . . .

but, wow, I had a real LOL moment when i read your post hehehe

i guess that means things are looking up for she and i ;)

"LET THE MAN PURSUE YOU! No matter how young or shy he is, he will step up if he's really interested. Can you give him a little hint that you're interested in perhaps getting to know him? Yes, but don't do any more than that. Men do not like aggressive women who pursue them."

Argh. Like I have said a million times. I propositioned him. I pursued him. He likes me. He was freaked out by the age difference and wasn't going to do it, so I had to. It's been five years.

It depends on the guy. It depends on the woman involved. It depends on the nature of their relationship.

There are no hard and fast rules that apply to everybody all the time. This is the only rule there is. :)

I've had more than one guy tell me that he wishes women wouldn't always leave everything up to them. I think it depends on the guy. I think IN GENERAL, guys like to be the pursuers. But everyone is so different... if hard and fast rules always held 100% of the time, we'd all know exactly how to get everything we want, and that just isn't the case, I'm afraid. I've met too many very different types of guy to think they all want exactly the same thing.

:)

I think this rule applies... if you want to meet a CERTAIN type of guy... traditional, take-charge. Not all of us need or want that type of guy. Not that there is anything wrong with those that do.

While there are no definitive rules that govern the masses one could easily draw the conclusion that many/most men do indeed prefer to be the pursuer.

I have to agree completely. In my case, I did try to pursue initially and the red flags went up - he drew way back into his corner. I ceased all my chasing shenanigans and waited him out. He did come out sniffing the territory checking to see if I'd come chasing him down again. I didn't. He even tried to set some traps. Nope. Wouldn't chase him. I goofed it up once and then stopped immediately.

Someone here on this board had been talking about laying low and letting the guy do the work. This person was advising someone else and I read the thread. She said to not answer every call. She said don't call unless you have a specific reason and then make it short. I got caller id and stopped breaking my neck to get to the phone. I didn't return all his calls either.

It nearly killed me!!! I was in major angst because I was doing it all differently than I had ever done before. Greg was your typical male and he did need to do everything. He needed to figure things out as he went along.

The person who talked about this stuff 3 and a half years ago was Polly. She talked about that ridiculous book called The Rules. I bought it. It was gross. But I did the stuff that would apply and I swear it worked.

Surely it doesn't work for everyone. But in most cases it does.

But what guy wouldn't run to see what Desert was all about once she started talking. Heck I'd date you myself Desert if I weren't so hetero.

Cindy

Aw .....

Me too, Cin. Me too.

Always good to have a fallback plan, eh?

:D

I know you didn't mean to sound smug with your opening line Polly, but the whole idea: "he's just not that into you" is nothing new. It's just a new way of saying: "let the guy do the work, you will scare him off with anything else!"
XOXO

Its not enough to just pursue a guy; you've also got to be good at it. I mean, if a tactless and switched off guy pursues a woman unsuccessfully, he doesn't blame his gender for his failure.....he tries to get better at pursuing women. The same could apply to women......the problem isn't that women should not pursue our lovers....we may simply be a bit lame at it because its a new area(and we also have to dela with lack of support at times for this behaviour). Anyway, whether youre a guy or a girl, if you'rew going to pursue someone you're nuts about, you still have to have tact. You still have to read all the signals correctly. And you can't be a dork. The same rules apply to us all.

I think the lady who wrote this book was probably just pretty lame at pursuing men and developed a whole world view based on this one experience (or pattern of experiences). Women chase men successfully all the time. And plenty are unsuccessful too.

They said everything I've always said...LET THE MAN PURSUE YOU! Sorry Polly, but you weren't the first. My Mom and her Mother came up with the same idea 70 years ago. Too bad someone just now wrote a book. You could have got the info free from them. :p

I ceased all my chasing shenanigans and waited him out. He did come out sniffing the territory checking to see if I'd come chasing him down again.

Loved this imagery, lol!

Why do women have to sit and wait and let men have all the fun? I said on my thread it's so frustrating that statistically, as sb put it, the relationship where men are pursuer have more chance of success. Sure, when girls do it, it looks as if we're trying to turn the whole world upside down. Some said it's in the genetic programing, to say men are hunters cuz they want to spread their sperms as much as possible. Whatever it is, I can say that being a pursuer, as hard as it is, is not boring tho it's risky and painstaking sometimes.

(I just need to find a man who's not scared, and then in the end let me take care of him as he of me).

I agree you got to apply rules to your situations. In my case, I found out early that I've broken so many rules in The Rules book. The new hype He's Just Not That Into You is basically 'Use your common sense and gut instinct'. Thing is, some of the rules I broke, it still worked in some areas. It might be like looking for a way to achieve cold fusion but alas I hope it will be bright and explosive when I find my rightest chemistry.

p.s. are there any other tactics rather than push and withdraw? it's true some men got scared when you're after them and when you lost your interst, they came around wondering 'what's up with her' and pursue instead. too late boys.

Desert Spring, you may have THOUGHT you were pursuing him, but from what I know of you, you're an extremely independent person, and always going off and doing stuff on your own, taking long trips by yourself, etc. Whenever your ym wanted to hang out with a girl his age casually, you didn't break a sweat. You've always been very cool, to the point of maybe appearing aloof to your bf at times, which would have given him the space to reciprocate pursuing. So, while you probably initiated things, your own independent personality allowed for him to pursue you, at least some of the time. Most women aren't as emotionally sane or secure as you are, and most women definitely aren't as independent.

YR, you're right, I didn't make that idea up, it's just something I've been saying at this site for ages! I wish I'd have written the book first. It wouldn't have been unique, but apparently enough people still seek out that advice that the book is a success.

I believe in the physiological reasons for a man needing to pursue a woman. I don't care what type of man he is or how shy he is, I buy into the whole hunter/gatherer theory. Unless a man is gay, he's going to want to be the hunter at some point. I guess it takes pure intuition to be able to tell when that point is, but I believe it's there in every hetrosexual man. Men who say they are tired of having to do all the work have maybe pursued women who really weren't that interested in them, therefore making the efforts worthless. A woman who rewards a man's pursuit with appreciation and affection will make pursuit a pleasant experience, and therefore he'll want to do it more.

Every man I ever pursued ran away from me screaming. I could never figure it out. I was pretty, nice build, lived in a nice place, had a nice life, and thought I was an interesting and funny person. What I didn't know, was that men perceived my genuine, open, wear-my-heart-on-my-sleeve affection as too much too soon...too intense. I thought I was being a good person for laying all my cards out on the table right away, but a man likes to discover a woman slowly, like a blooming flower. He likes to take time to romance her, work to take her out, plan things, and as she rewards him here and there, he is inclined to do more of the same.

Robin wasn't a heavy pursuer, but I recognized that he did have somewhat of a need to pursue, so I made myself available for him to chase me.:)

By now I'm sure people know how I feel about these gender-based "rules." I'm with PinkCat on this, I've known enough guys to have seen that there isn't just one rule for every one. We'd be pretty pissed if men treated us like we were all the same, and lots still do, although it's less so than it used to be.

In the case of my honey and me, I'm not sure there was ever any "chase," on either side. It was completely unnecessary. He found and wrote to me first, but we were 800 miles away from each other and at the time I wasn't considering non-locals. (I was occasionally making first contact myself with locals.) But there was no convincing involved. It was simply an option I hadn't tapped, which I was open to as soon as it appeared. I'd done LD before and the concept was just fine with me, I'd simply been concentrating on local possibilities at that moment.

We quickly developed a wonderfully enjoyable high-volume correspondence, then both of us independently made mental decisions about wanting to visit. He surprised me with arrangements he'd made to come to my town to stay with another friend (which later evolved into him staying the entire time at my place instead). I had just been about to invite him myself when he told me of the plan, and said so.

Then when we met in person, neither of us had any doubts, we were completely open about our interest in each other. We moved so shockingly fast in the steps we both took to further things, I'm sure either one of us could have been poster children for "how to be so intense it would scare someone away." Only neither was the slightest bit scared.

So, yeah, I can't really say either one of us was a pursuer per se. Every single step of it was mutual, we were at the same speed *exactly*, the entire time. There was NO game-playing or manipulation or strategizing, not one bit. And that's the way I prefer things. I don't see why people seem to think mutuality isn't an option. For me it is the ideal.

Like PinkCat said, and this is a point I made in a thread on this subject earlier, you will get a certain kind of guy with the hunter/prey method and not others. It -is- like hunting or fishing or whatever - you use one method to catch a trout, another to catch a turkey. Someone trained to hunt turkeys just might come to the conclusion that trout don't exist, because they never catch any. Seems to me that is similar to what goes on with these "rules." (And sorry, but I hate being looked at as prey. :P)

I knew I didn't want the traditional man-in-charge type of guy, so I didn't use the traditional style of hunting for one. I also don't want someone I have to boss around. There are -3- basic options available, not just 2!

I wanted someone who is fully mutual, and I got him. Our style of courtship fit who we are perfectly. Steven Covey had this little phrase "begin with the end in mind," which makes sense applied to seeking a partner. The results you get will be related to the means you use. Pure logic, my dear Watson. ;)

Originally posted by Nessa
and YES everyone is different BUT... it has never failed that the only men that want me are the ones i dont' want.
i was gearing up to leave.

THAT's when bri did his turn around and he made his commitment when I was not the pursuer.....

just my experience.

These may be so. But they don't necessarily have anything to do with gender.

And we've all known guys who have issues with this stuff. Have you not also known women who are the same way? I most -definitely- have known women like that.

My point was just that, contrary to what some insist, *not all guys are like this* and frankly...I prefer a man who wants me just as much as I want him and is able to express it. Pretty common-sense...I don't want to be in a situation where I express my interest and love and it makes him want me LESS. What a thankless position to be in.

Anyway this sort of discussion is more like philosophy and theory. While it is fun, it's kind of like politics...there are things you can point to but people have their views and can't always see what you see, no matter how obvious it seems to you yourself. I'm a pragmatic, so I try to point out examples carefully. All I can do is try. :)

Every man I ever pursued ran away from me screaming. I could never figure it out. I was pretty, nice build, lived in a nice place, had a nice life, and thought I was an interesting and funny person.

Just out of curiosity, how many men was that? (meant light-heartedly:) If you're anything like me, its helpful to remember that an experience that has happened to you personally only a handful of (or less) times is not always a good basis for an entire world view:)

Oh, and I agree with your self appraisal, Polly!

I just wanted to ask if you had considered that perhaps your experiences are partly a reflection of being a `pursuer? Think about it...sometimes a `pursuer's' advances will be recieved well and sometimes they won't. Theres not always a good reason. Sometimes its just lack of experience, sometimes you just don't know the full story about your object of interest. Men learn not to take it personally or give up, and perhaps so should we.

I truly think men grow accustomed to accepting rejection upon rejection from women from quite a young age and some quite casually accept it as part of the dating game. But for women, especially being so sensitive, the rejection feels like a cruel blow and we take it to heart. MAny of us are just not used to stepping outside of the safety zone of passive seduction, but thats not to say that sexual assertiveness can't work for us too. Just maybe not every time. We need to get our expectations right from the beginning.

In my opinion, it would be a mistake to give up allowing oneself the freedom to pursue what we want in life based on a few early failures. Man or woman. And I feel that its important for women to feel that we CAN seize what we want from life, an not have to wait around being evaluated by guys. And we really should be giving each other permission to do this too!

What I didn't know, was that men perceived my genuine, open, wear-my-heart-on-my-sleeve affection as too much too soon...too intense.

Polly, I sincerely believe that this comment speaks more truthfully of what was going on for you in those early experiences. The problem, as you have ananlysed it, was not related to your gender at all, but to your approach. I doubt that a man pursuing a woman with this approach would have more success than you.......I think perhaps `intensity' too early on in a seduction process in itself can put people off. Not just guys, but women too. I am quite confidenet that you wouldn't make that mistake again. Its just something we ALL do when we're inexperienced.

Anyway this sort of discussion is more like philosophy and theory. While it is fun, it's kind of like politics...there are things you can point to but people have their views and can't always see what you see, no matter how obvious it seems to you yourself.

I really enjoyed your posts, as always Goldiecat. So thoughtful and sane:)

Yes, I believe it was Kristin that had a thread about this awhile back...perhaps the two threads could be merged.:)

Well Bella D, it was PLENTY of men! I could sit here all afternoon and try to count them all, but I don't have that kind of time!:D I wasn't trying to brag on myself via the self-appraisal, I'm certainly not built well now and my life is much more hectic, but back then, I felt like I had a lot to offer a man. I kept thinking, "What in the world am I doing wrong?" I didn't think I was being overly intense. I called men when I felt like it, I showed up at their watering holes when I felt like it, I planned dates and asked them out when I felt like it. When they tried to pay for my drinks or dinner, I wouldn't let them, yet I'd buy them one. I thought I was letting them know that I was generous, I wasn't a golddigger, and I was independent.

None of these things was bad. Guys do them. So why did men excuse themselves for the bathroom and never come back to the table? Here's why:

By calling them whenever I felt like it, which may have been more often than they liked to talk on the phone, my behavior was almost intrusive, although I certainly didn't see it that way. I like to talk on the phone. Most men, however, really don't. Only ones who are truly interested in us will do it for a long period of time, and then only until they finally live with us. Women use the phone as a tool to figure out their emotions by talking to other people. Men use the phone as a tool to order pizza and relay pertinent information, such as "Hey Bill. The game starts at 8. Do I bring beer, or do you have some? Okay, I'll bring some. See ya."

Showing up at a man's place of refuge uninvited, even though it's a public place and perfectly legal, is absolutely stalkerish to a man. I didn't see this, I thought I was being nice by making myself conveniently available for his company. I thought, "Hey, I'll show up where Steve stops in for a beer after work, and he'll be so happy to see me!" I didn't consider that he might be having a hard day and not feel like socializing, or he might be having a personal problem and just want to talk to his buddy about it.

Paying for a man. Now, no matter WHAT men say about liking it when a woman pays, they're LYING! Men express their affection through money. Allowing them to pay for something is a privilege to them for the honor of your company. I didn't know that. I thought men only paid because they felt they HAD to, so I thought I'd be nice and always pay for myself. It pissed guys off! They thought I was some controlling b!tch who had to have the upper hand.

After I sent the umpteenth man screaming and running for the hills, I decided to buy a vowel. I bought the book, "The Rules", which has fans and foes alike at this site, and it changed my whole, entire life! It taught me how men think, how I need to love myself and be confident, and truly BELIEVE that I was worthy of a good man's attention and his gifts. My behavior changed, and dating became a wonderful, pleasurable experience, not a desperate maneuver to find a mate. I am truly convinced that The Rules helped me form a healthy relationship with Robin.

Goldiecat, I believe your bf WAS pursuing you. He wrote you first. He came out and visited you first, he planned it, etc. Yes, you wanted it to happen equally, but he made the first move. Even though he said he was staying at his friend's, I'll bet if you go and ask him right now where he REALLY was planning on staying, he'll say, "YOUR place, of course!" The dynamics of a LDR are different than those of a local dating relationship, so yeah, there was not as much time to have to sit back and "be busy". The long distance did it for you. With me, Robin lived five minutes up the street, and it took everything I had not to camp out in his yard!:D Okay, so maybe I AM a little stalkerish. The point is, I really, really wanted him, and I wasn't desperate, I had plenty of men to date, but he was the one, I just knew it. However, he was also a little gun-shy having just ended a very unhealthy relationship, so I had to sit back and let him pursue me so he could set the pace of the relationship and feel comfortable with the progression of it.

Most men (not all, but most) don't feel a real need to get into a commited relationship. They enjoy their freedom and the prospect of being sexual with other women. It isn't until they fall in love that this changes for them.

Most women (not all, but most) feel better about life when they're in a relationship. Because they connect sex with emotional intimacy (and men do not) they have more of a need for a monogamous relationship. Again, I think this has to do with hormones and years of instinct. Hunters provide and protect. Gatherers nurture and provide care. A woman in a good relationship feels taken care of and protected, even if she makes more money than her spouse. A man in a good relationship feels protective of his beloved wife, and strives to provide for her. This is an utmost satisfaction to him. He also feels cared for and appreciated. This motivates him to succeed more. You've heard that saying "Behind every good man is a good woman." It's true. When a man has a good woman in his life who loves him and adores him, he has the power and encouragement to reach for the sky.

So, to get the two opposite sexes to meet in the middle, the woman has to "play the man's game" (and make no mistake, it IS a man's game...I wish we could all just pursue and not worry about it, but it's not so. Blame the men for that one) and make him open up and trust enough to fall in love, so he'll want to be in a relationship with her. Biologically, men have no desire to be with just one person. We have to give him reasons to want to do that.

Don't bombard me now! We're just having a friendly discussion here. Don't shoot the messenger. :)

I have to agree with this concept that men prefer to pursue the woman. I'm not saying that it should be that way. I'm only saying that based upon my own experiences, I've noticed that most relationships begin that way.

I've been thinking back on my own past relationships, as well as my current one, and in each one, the man pursued me. In those where I was the pursuer, not once was I successful in "catching" him. I think that most guys prefer that chase.

I will say that poor Remi had to pursue me the longest than any other guy, for many reasons. But, that's what makes our relationship even sweeter. I really feel wanted by him since he went to all that time and trouble to get my attention.

Hey, I just want to start off by saying that POLLY -- I hope you know that I think you are fabulous!! If I disagree with you here, it doesn't change that at all! :) I mean that!

About the guys liking to pay for things: in general, this is true. But there are many women out there with cheapskate boyfriends who will definitely beg to differ... ;)

And I just think that if someone has found that pursuing men doesn't work ever, it has more to do with a) the type of man she is attracted to, and b) the style of pursuing. Yes, men in general like to pursue. But it's not always the case 100% of the time. If all men were the same... well... I might just be wearing a pair of Birkenstocks right now (no offense intended to those who wear Birkenstocks).

:D

OH -- and having said all that.... I PREFER when the man is the pursuer. You know, just so I know that he likes me and stuff. But I am super-passive... I realize that not everyone is like that...

:D

Originally posted by 1love
Yes, I believe it was Kristin that had a thread about this awhile back...perhaps the two threads could be merged.:)

Yep, we started a pretty good discussion, but it kinda petered out:

http://www.agelesslove.com/boards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13287

Glad to see it back revived.

I think we should merge them and sticky them - might help a lot of people looking for advice! :)

Originally posted by Polly
Goldiecat, I believe your bf WAS pursuing you. He wrote you first. He came out and visited you first, he planned it, etc. Yes, you wanted it to happen equally, but he made the first move. Even though he said he was staying at his friend's, I'll bet if you go and ask him right now where he REALLY was planning on staying, he'll say, "YOUR place, of course!" The dynamics of a LDR are different than those of a local dating relationship, so yeah, there was not as much time to have to sit back and "be busy". The long distance did it for you.

Polly...I knew you were going to take what looked like him doing things "first" as support for your theory...but it's not quite like that. I tried to explain that I wasn't looking where he was, so I didn't know he was there. He did plan the visit, but he had more than one reason to come (and we did meet with that other friend as well). Really, the plan -wasn't- for him to stay just with me originally. We didn't change that until the time got much closer.

But no matter who contacted whom, I guess my point was that I didn't have to pretend I wasn't interested in order to keep -him- interested. If there was pursuit, it was a pursuit of *each other* - which my honey appreciates. It really was mutual the whole way. Neither one needed more time, or anything like that, to get to the same place. In many relationships I suppose it's possible that one "knows" before the other that they want a particular level of closeness, or whatever. Maybe we were just lucky in that?

Maybe the point you traditional folks are trying to make has more to do with "if a guy isn't already interested, pursuing him won't make him interested." That would be fair enough. However, the same is exactly true for me - that is, if I don't have a seed of interest in a guy, no amount of pursuit of me will change that in itself. In fact it annoys me.

Some guys (guys? Where are you? Speak up!) actually like being asked out, etc. etc., but I'd guess that if he doesn't find her immediately attractive he's as likely not to be terribly interested, just the way it is for us. (Hmm...this actually reminds me of a guy in high school who started dating another girl and told me that he wasn't dating me because I hadn't asked! I ended up with someone else anyway, but - well, there was one guy who would have preferred me to start things. Later on we -did- get together for a bit, but that's another story.)

Ok...I suppose what I object to is the idea, once again, that a woman needs to suppress herself or play games or strategize to keep a man's interest, even if he was the pursuer initially. Just hasn't been the case for me, like...ever. I believe in straight communication, and it has worked just fine. *shrug*

Ok Kristin, I'll merge the two threads.

Hey, thanks Whiterose! :D

People see what they want to see and project their needs, wants and desires on the other person - that is the biggest mistake made.

If people would just take a second to read the other person's reactions and body language, they would know where they stand with a person. It's called "Can't take a hint."

If you are the pursuer - male or female - and the other person isn't responding, it's not that they don't like to be pursued, aren't ready for a relationship or just too busy right now. The whole point is <b>that they are just not that into you!</b>

No offense, Polly, but you missed the whole point of the book. (See the beginning of this newly merged thread). Those guys you pursued just weren't that into you. If they were, they would have welcomed the attention. You did the right thing and moved on - exactly what the authors were trying to encourage - and found a great guy that is that into you! :)

But no matter who contacted whom, I guess my point was that I didn't have to pretend I wasn't interested in order to keep -him- interested.

Exactly -- in my (male!) opinion, doing this sort of thing is just manipultive. Hiding your own feelings just means that you're presenting a false persona to your partner, and it's that persona that he/she will fall in love with.

Either you'll be stuck manipulating him/her for the remainder of the relationship (by keeping up the false persona if you're nice, and by faking hurt/etc if you're not nice), or you'll eventually let the false persona slip -- a classic bait and switch.

While backing off and not being stalkerish is one thing, pretending you have less interest than you really do is another. Relationships aren't about emotional tests ("I'll stop calling him and see if he loves me enough!" "I'll forget to remind him it's my birthday and see if he remembers!" "I'll ask him if I look fat in this!"), and conducting them is tantamount to fraud.

"Desert Spring, you may have THOUGHT you were pursuing him, but from what I know of you, you're an extremely independent person, and always going off and doing stuff on your own, taking long trips by yourself, etc. Whenever your ym wanted to hang out with a girl his age casually, you didn't break a sweat. You've always been very cool, to the point of maybe appearing aloof to your bf at times, which would have given him the space to reciprocate pursuing. So, while you probably initiated things, your own independent personality allowed for him to pursue you, at least some of the time"

OK, to some degree your point is granted. I didn't stalk him or suggest the names of our future children. It's just that I don't think that behavior works particularly well when women OR MEN do it in the early stages of a relationship. It's just plain creepy. I'm not sure that's quite the same issue as saying that pursuing men turns them off. As Bella_D said (see Bella, we do agree on one or two things) there are many ways to pursue a romantic partner.

In my particular situation, we did have a friendship that pre-dated the romance by two months, so that helped, but I did do the following:

I called him before he ever called me.

I sexually propositioned him and invited him over to my place (as a casual invitation because I was also freaked by the age difference at that time).

I told him I loved him first.

I suggested we move in together first.

These are just the facts. He has told me that if I hadn't propositioned him, he doesn't think he ever would have made a pass because he was intimidated by the age difference. It's possible that he's full of crap, but that's what he has repeatedly said.

Why wasn't he scared off? There may be an age differential here. He was raised by a single mom. He was brought up to respect women as fellow human beings - not as people to bully, manipulate and chase and run away from. I think that does make a difference. He was taught not to whistle at girls or to push for sex - and I just don't think he was terribly inclined to shove me up against a wall and kiss me unless he was very, very, very sure that I wanted it too. (LOL - he still isn't so inclined even though I keep telling him I LIKE it).

What I will say though, is that even though I was the one who initiated the moves to the different levels of our relationship, he always responded with alacrity. He called back, he said I love you back, he moved in. I do think THAT matters.

He let me go first, but when I took my courage in my hands and did it, he showed me he was in to me.

Either you'll be stuck manipulating him/her for the remainder of the relationship (by keeping up the false persona if you're nice, and by faking hurt/etc if you're not nice), or you'll eventually let the false persona slip -- a classic bait and switch.

I think this point brought up by Goldenhawk is also VERY important.......if you are, at the very least, an assertive person who normally expresses what she wants, then behaving in a passive, coquetish fashion in order to hook a man may attract the wrong man for you, and feel kind of fake.

Like Goldenhawk suggested. the problem is that its hard and also agonising to sustain a set of uncharactistic behaviours designed to `hook' a guy. Its probabaly just better to be assertive if thats who you are. If some guys reject that, then at least you found out in the beginning, and not much later on when the facade is too hard to maintain.

What an insightful guy you are, Goldenhawk!

Originally posted by Desert Spring
What I will say though, is that even though I was the one who initiated the moves to the different levels of our relationship, he always responded with alacrity. He called back, he said I love you back, he moved in. I do think THAT matters.


Of course he did - because he was really into you!! :)

(And who wouldn't be??)

Okay, Kristin, I'm sorry I missed your thread and took the liberty of starting my own. In the old days, this wouldn't have been a big deal, but I guess now that there are so many members and threads, it's best to condense things. I feel though, that my particular meaning is lost in it.:(

For instance, you're saying that because I pursued guys that weren't that into me, I was the one making the mistakes. The thing is, in the beginning, they WERE that into me. That's where the confusion set in. Guys will ACT LIKE they're really into you for two reasons:

1. To have sex.

2. To get to know you and then have sex.

Every guy I ever pursued showed a strong initial interest in me, even if he didn't initiate the introduction. Strangely enough, as things progressed, he would become more distant. I think a lot of women here have that same problem because we try to relate to men like we do to women.

What do we do when we make a new female friend? We go home feeling great, we promise to call her, and the next chance we get when a mutual interest crops up, we call her! Or...she calls us! We're happy to hear from her, or her from us, we talk, and we talk, and we talk some more, and then we meet at some place of mutual interest and talk some more, and then we go home, call her, or she calls us, we whine about our kids, our bills, our neighbors, and then we say goodnight and are happy as pigs in slop because we found someone who liked to talk and listen just like us!

What happens when we try that with men?

This is what it feels like for a man to talk on a phone for a long period of time about emotions and problems...a sharp stick being shoved in his eye...again...and again...and again! Towards the end of the conversation, he's mixing up a concoction of some poison mixture so he can suddenly have seizures and have a real reason to get off the phone, and have the hospital emergency records to prove it!

I think the thing that confuses women the most is the man being so engaging and positive at first, and then petering off. This is bewildering and hurtful. It's also less likely to happen if the man is the strong pursuer from the very beginning. If he strongly pursues you, and then backs quickly off, he might be gay or married. There might be some serious complication there. If he continues on a steady path of pursuit with no backing down, it's a very good sign.

To women who decide to pursue, go right ahead if your hearts can take it.:)

This thread made me think of an eBook that I have and love. It's called Rousing the Lion and you can even get a free sample e-mailed to you if you go to this address: http://www.emotionaldoorway.com/ Have fun!

Maybe a part of what we're saying here is that, for some of us, it just feels really "not us" to follow these rules, and somehow we believe that if we follow our own intuition, we're more likely to connect with someone who really likes the "genuine us".

And we're willing to endure the rejection to get what we want.

And others feel like their intuitive tendency is to over-pursue and go too far, too fast, and they need to put the reins on in order not to overwhelm a perfectly nice guy and make him back up a little no matter how into them he is.

Just sounds like people with different personalities and tendencies.

Maybe the key is to figure out what kinda woman we are - and act accordingly :D

Originally posted by Desert Spring
Maybe a part of what we're saying here is that, for some of us, it just feels really "not us" to follow these rules, and somehow we believe that if we follow our own intuition, we're more likely to connect with someone who really likes the "genuine us".

And we're willing to endure the rejection to get what we want.

And others feel like their intuitive tendency is to over-pursue and go too far, too fast, and they need to put the reins on in order not to overwhelm a perfectly nice guy and make him back up a little no matter how into them he is.

Just sounds like people with different personalities and tendencies.

Maybe the key is to figure out what kinda woman we are - and act accordingly :D

I believe that is excellent advice DS! You hit the nail on the head... just sounds like people with different personalities and tendencies. :p

Originally posted by Bella_D
What an insightful guy you are, Goldenhawk!

Yeah... he really is...

*beaming with pride* :D

Right, sorry for the interruption. As you were. :cool:

Originally posted by Polly
Guys will ACT LIKE they're really into you for two reasons:

1. To have sex.

2. To get to know you and then have sex.

SOME guys will, yes, ABSOLUTELY do this. So who wants 'em? Those guys are @SSHOLES. Good riddance!

we found someone who liked to talk and listen just like us!

What happens when we try that with men?

Umm...I get a guy who I can really identify with on a lot of levels, he's my best friend *and* lover? I dunno...that's what I wanted, and that's what I got. *shrug* He doesn't like to talk or listen any less than I do.

But as noted below, I think this may partly have to do with -what- I talk about...

This is what it feels like for a man to talk on a phone for a long period of time about emotions and problems...

Well ya see...I think you're assuming something else here. Emotions and problems aren't a big part of my conversations with anyone, female -or- male. If a guy did the "emotions and problems" thing on the phone with -me- all the time, I'd run too! Come to think of it, I remember a few examples of where that exact thing happened with whiny guys. (You probably don't like listening to whiners - of any gender - either.)

If you are female and doing the unloading, you may naturally assume that it's guys who are driven away by it. Nope...we all can be, they have no monopoly on that.

(Oh BTW Bella D...thanks for your compliment earlier, I was going to say you've made some good points on this thread as well. Especially the one about people not realizing that their experience of something isn't the only version there is. Good point. :) :))

-I know some guys who can't stand talking on the phone. About anything.

-I have a male friend who will call me, we will talk for hours on end about whether the person he tried to score with recently actually has any feelings for him, to the point where I'm watching TV and just saying, "Yeah, uh huh, yeah" at the right times because I don't really care that much.

-I don't talk to my female friends on the phone. Rarely, anyway. I don't enjoy it at all, unless it's to arrange specific plans. I am female.

-I can't stand whining... ("Oh, he does this and that, what should I do?" "Dump his ***." "Oh, but I looooove him." "Then deal with it.")

Conclusion: everyone is different. Broad generalizations don't cover everyone. And Kristin is right when she points out that the point of the whole book we are (or were) talking about is that people should not ignore signs that someone isn't that into them. It's not about The Rules per se. It's not about women needing to learn to be more passive.

Okay, Kristin, I'm sorry I missed your thread and took the liberty of starting my own....I feel though, that my particular meaning is lost in it.
Didn't mean to steal your steam. Someone suggested merging the threads first and I just seconded it. And I felt that others seeing the links that I posted would shed more light on the topic. I also feel that your "particular meaning" is lost because that really wasn't the point that the authors were making. They didn't say "Don't pursue". They said, "Don't keep pursuing if the guy is giving you these obvious signs that he's just not that into you.

The thing is, in the beginning, they WERE that into me. That's where the confusion set in. Guys will ACT LIKE they're really into you for two reasons:
Who says they were acting? You highlighted the right word here. "WERE". As things progressed, they realized that they actually weren't that into you. Maybe it was because you came on too strong for their taste, definitely if you got all serious after only a few days (jumped the gun) or tried to relate to them like you would a woman and maybe it was for any number of other reasons.

I know I've gone out on a couple dates with guys that I really liked at first but then realized that we were on different planes or had different agendas. That made me realize that I wasn't as into them as I thought. It's also less likely to happen if the man is the strong pursuer from the very beginning. Exactly! Because he's into you! And if you pursue him first, if he's into you, he'll respond appropriately and if he's not, maybe he'll give it a go but then it will taper off. That shouldn't stop you from being the pursuer, it just means that you are taking a chance that he won't be into you. But sometimes it's worth taking the chance rather than just sitting around hoping someone will notice you and be the pursuer!

talk on a phone for a long period of time about emotions and problems There's a right time to do this and a wrong time. Jeremy and I talked all the time like that very early- but he was really into me! On the other hand, he had a girlfriend last year that he thought was great when they first went out. But then, 4 days later, she was already talking marriage, kids and other craziness. He ran like the wind! Not because he didn't want those things, but he thought she was pretty freaky for bringing those things up when she barely knew him! (Funny, we were just talking about that last night!)

Well Kristen, I didn't mean talking MARRIAGE and such when I meant talking emotion and problems. I meant, what I would talk to a girl about, upon meeting her, which is still way different than what a guy would want to talk about.

Some of you are very different from me, which is great!:) I love hearing all aspects of a scenario.

But, the women I tend to make close friends with are women who are interested in talking about emotional issues, relationship issues, and life issues. Yes, we talk about fun stuff too, but I love a friend who I can talk to about things with real substance. The men I'm attracted to can do this too, but only after they've gotten to know me and have either wanted to be really good friends with me or fallen in love with me. Trying to bombard a man with the same stuff you could talk to a woman about just doesn't work in most cases, in the early stages.

Some of you may be more logical and "male-minded" than me. Goldiecat and Desert Spring, perhaps you are. Do you by any chance hold degrees in Engineering? Because most logical women I know do!:D I don't know why that is, it just is. A lot of women I know though, are like me, illogical, sentimental, a bit sensitive, and always confused about what men really want. The thing is, my friends and me, we LOVE MEN! We really, really do. We just don't understand them. We don't think like them, or act like them, or even pretend to like some of the stuff they like! But we LOVE THEM, as they are, and we want to make them happy.

Maybe it has to do with where we live...in the Midwest, out in the sticks, but I like some things that come with that. Men out here are dedicated and true blue. They might not be rocket scientists, but they take care of things, from fixing a leaky roof to tearing down a barn to cleaning a cistern, and they LOVE WOMEN, even if they don't understand or talk like them. Just like my friends and me are confused about men, men are as confused about women around here. They find it absolutely AMAZING that all women have the same fascination in shoes, or that they can whip up a tasty dinner from scraps, or that they can shuffle soccer practices, teacher conferences, and mortgage payments on time without breaking a sweat.

Yeah, maybe we are talking about different men and different lifestyles. I guess a man who would have endured my intensity would have been a "yes" man, which would have been great at first, but not been able to handle anything without my direction. I'm not saying that any of you has a man like that, I'm saying that my intense pursuit would have only been endured by someone like that, and ironically, that isn't who I would have wanted.

By changing my dating behavior, I got the man I wanted. He wasn't a "yes" man or a submissive man, he was a man's man, and yeah, I guess I like that kind of guy! He's in touch with his feminine side enough to clean the house spic and span or redecorate the bedroom, but he can still haul a load of wood over 300 pounds or fix anything that breaks in the house. He isn't a quitter, and that teaches my kids a lot, being around him. He fights for what he believes in, works to get what he wants, and doesn't let my kids question their own abilities. He says, "You can do it! I know you can do it, and you know it too! All you have to do is try!"

I think a lot of men I pursued were like Robin, maybe not as great as he is, because to me he's the best, but things might have worked out with the others had I backed off. That's all I'm trying to say...is that intense, driven women like me need to back off and give the guy a chance to have some control of the dating relationship.

If you're a male-minded, logical female, then you don't even need to worry about it. If you're illogical, emotionally driven, and "hysterical" like me, then pursuit is not ever a good idea. Letting him know you're intersted is fine, but letting him take the reigns from there is a smart move!

If you're a male-minded, logical female, then you don't even need to worry about it. If you're illogical, emotionally driven, and "hysterical" like me, then pursuit is not ever a good idea. Letting him know you're intersted is fine, but letting him take the reigns from there is a smart move!

Wow, what a great insight, Polly! I didn't think of that! I am very "male-minded, logical". The kind of stuff I usually would talk to a guy about is football, politics, etc. I love hanging around guys and talking "guy talk" more than girly stuff. Even my choice of entertainment (TV/Movies) tend to run male-oriented. (A recent rental of 'Something's Gotta Give" not withstanding - I do like romantic comedies). I think you uncovered our sticky spot. Elementary my dear Watson! :)

Originally posted by Polly
Some of you may be more logical and "male-minded" than me. Goldiecat and Desert Spring, perhaps you are. Do you by any chance hold degrees in Engineering? Because most logical women I know do!:D

Heh. Well, no, my MA is in Art History. :P But my father was a chemical engineer, and my honey is big into math and sciences, physics, electronics, that sort of stuff. At this very moment he's reading a book on "Physical Geology" as a break from devouring a biography of Buckminster Fuller...but the other day he was reading about architecture. I like science a fair amount too, yes, but it's not where I concentrate my interests these days.

And as I remember, DS's guy is doing his PhD in Physics, right DS?

So the scientific personality, we do get along with. And yes, I am logical and scientific in the way I think and do things, although I've learned to broaden that quite a bit.

In any case, I do bristle at the gender stereotypes, I guess partly because I've never fit them. Sure, I may have such things in my background as dance, various types of needlework, nice clothes, and an appreciation of shoes and dressing up and such, but...a lot of "girly" stuff I could never get into. Never liked dolls, or frilly things, or pink, or chick flicks. I'll watch good sci-fi special effects movies ANY DAY. Explosions and all. ;)

But Polly...if a woman is logical, does that make her "male-minded?" I've always found that point of view kind of odd...if I'm female, isn't being logical just as female a trait? I know what you mean about not knowing as many logical women...but really now...how many guys do you know who are THAT logical? I'll tell ya one thing I've observed...my man is WAY more ruled by his emotional reactions to things than I am. He may not "act emotional" in the usual sense; he acts just like you'd say a guy would. Still, he is emotionally reactive in a way that I'm not. I do think that people are more individual and at the same time more alike, than the stereotypes credit us for.

Anyway...I think this last post you wrote was very graceful. Rock on. :)

(Just saw Kristin's post as I was writing this, so...yeah, there are those of us who are less "girly". I take it a step further and rather than consider myself masculine about certain things, I just remove the gender labeling from them 'cause they've been invalidated for me.)

Okay, so we're narrowing it down to women who are prone to fit a "feminine" set of behaviors, and women who don't. That would explain why the women who don't, don't have a problem relating to men. These women are clearly attractive, clearly hetro, yet their brains are wired enough to relate to their man's way of thinking.

The men I know around here are so logical, I could call them ALL Mr. Spoc (sp?) Women indentify the problem and fret about it...men evaluate it and solve it. That's how it works around here. That's why when it comes to an emotional problem, men and women are at a roadblock. She's going, "Can't you SEE what's wrong with us???" and he's scratching his head and saying, "Okay, we're stressed, let's go out to dinner and a movie and it'll all be okay." or "Okay, you're obviously insane right now and anything I say will be wrong. Hows about we hit the Krispy Kreme stand on the way home and maybe you'll calm down once the sugar kicks in!"

Robin and I love eachother dearly. I look at him and think, "He's a God!" at times. He looks at me and thinks, "She's so wonderful!" at times. The times we're not thinking that, we're thinking, "What kind of a creature ARE YOU, and how in the world can you THINK THAT WAY???" Still, we love eachother and cherish eachother despite our differences. He will never understand women, and I will never understand men. I love men, I'm fascinated by men, I can't live without them...but I'll never in a million years UNDERSTAND them. I guess that's why I needed to buy a book to tell me how to act to reach the other species. :D

I have to say this: The women I know who have more logical brains, have very happy, stable marriages. Their husbands are getting literally the woman of their dreams...someone who isn't insane, illogical or emotionally tumultuous, someone who isn't impulsive or assuming, someone who takes time to evaluate a situation before reacting, in other words, someone who doesn't act like...MEEEE!:D I'm trying though folks, it takes time to train an old dog new tricks.

I'm still happy I had a book to help me curb my behaviors in the meantime, and I still think others that need that kind of help should get it and adhere to it!

Agreed!

And boy can I not do calculus! Ever!

(Boyfriend insists I could if I would simply "apply myself", but he is dead wrong :D )

But yeah, I've always been a guy with tits.

lol.....

I saw a show once that forever changed how I reacted to men. I can't remember the name, but I found an article that is very similar:
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:UE81vAVl1SYJ:abcnews.go.com/onair/DailyNews/braingame020731.html+brain+connected+language+spat ial+multitasking&hl=en

It talks about how men and women have different connections between the brain halves and that affects how we react to things. It also said evolution had a lot to do with it as well.

Women have eveolved fom the hunter/gather days to have slightly superior language skills because they needed language more to care for the young & sick. Tests showed that we read facial expressions better. This is what leads us to talk so much more than men and have a higher sensitivity to other's emotions.

It even showed that the hunter in ancient man benefits men today with slightly better spacial skills (which translates to being better at math and paralell parking cars). Because our brains are better connected, we use more of it and can multitask better. Men aren't hampered with this and can focus better.

But the differences in empathy and language is what hit me the most. One example was an after dinner scenario. One woman gets up to do dishes and the other women immediately get up to help her. It never crosses the guy's mind to do that with his buddies. That reaction of the women was because of empathy for the one having to do the work! The empathy grew in women from ancient times and was lessend in males. Which makes sense because you can't have a hunter that feels sorry for his dinner! :p

Anyhow, I'm proabaly not explaining it well and it will cause an uproar, but the TV show really made sense as to why we communicate things differently and why we react differently.

Oh, the funniest part of the show was the multitasking test. In something like 3 minutes, the person had to microwave something, answer the phone, type something and answer the door. In multiple tests, the women never had a problem completing the test. None of the men, however, could do it. They didn;t think to do things like put the stuff in the microwave to start and answer the phone on the way to the door. They would have to put down the phone to start the microwave, etc. It was so cute! :D

Kristin, I think that whole concept is fascinating. I love learning about why men and women are different. There has to be a logical explanation and the one you're presenting definitely makes sense to me. I think it's great to learn these differences, so that we can appreciate the differences, rather than using them as criticisms of our partners.

Great post!

What a great thread this has turned out to be....Polly, Desert Spring, Goldiecat....I found all your posts so full of insight. I really enjoyed reading these last posts a lot.

The only *teeny* thing I'd like to add is that I don't really like qualities such as `logic' `reason' and `emotional stability' to be termed `male traits'. I'm a woman. Desert is a woman, so is Goldiecat. We're not men in woman's bodies, we're women with these particular qualities.

I guess what I'm tryign to say is that perhaps this whole thread is a testimant to the diversity of women's personality traits these days. No need to accuse women who are not like Polly of not being very `womanly'. I'm just as womanly as any one else here. I simply have different traits. Not more `masculine' traits...just dfferent.

Ok, (stepping down from soap box).

Polly, I think you're just great the way you are. I'm glad you feel tolerant of other people's differences and view those differences in a psoitive light. Well, thats exactly how I feel abotu you...admiring for your differences. Also, you've really opened my eyes up to what a compassionate and understanding person you are even if we're unalike in someways..

Oh, and I apologize for implying that those positive traits only belong to men. I know they don't! No, I don't think being as nuts as me qualifies one as being womanly, it just means they're nuts. :D I guess I just know a lot of nutty women, and I relate really well to them, but I also admire and respect women who are logical, reasonable and who think before they react...I am trying to learn those behaviors, but it's not easy. It's like trying to teach a pig to sing. It frustrates the teacher and annoys the pig.

There are men like Robin who somehow handle "hysterical women" like me. It is through his masculinity, some of which is his logical, reserved behavior, that he can effectively deal with my nuttiness. He actually enjoys it! I guess it's like training a hyper dog to sit calmly at the dinner table or something, I don't know. It's like a triumph for him each time I get one step closer to sanity and reasoning. I don't know what he'll do once I'm totally sane and reasonable, no blow-ups, no unfounded accusations, no teary-eyed hormonal outbursts...I guess he'll have to buy a hyper dog to train at the dinner table!:D

I think I must be somewhere in between the two sexes.
I love being feminine in the way I dress and look, and have a lot of the nurturing and empathic traits associated with women, but I love sci-fi, gadgets and gizmo's, computers and gaming, cars and bikes, all the things a guy is supposed to love.
I tend to react on two levels to situations, there is the heart reaction, which is the feminine emotional side of me, but my head also works, and takes a more logical view. Sometimes my hearts wins the argument and I can get as histerical or upset as anyone else(this happens more at pms time), but sometimes my head wins and I can look at the situation logically, and tell myself to calm down and not let my emotions take over.
I must be a hermaphrodite!:D

Just bumping this thread. I think some people could use it! :)