"I'll text you" - what does that mean???

[desperategirl]

Hey,

 

a little context: went on a date with a guy I met OLD - went out very quickly after exchanging a couple of messages (the next day) which I am cool with. Hate sending messages for ages, would rather meet up, see if there's anything there.

 

Went out, had a lovely night. He asked about second date during first, which he said was against the 'rules' (we were laughing about dating rules) but said he really liked me, so it was cool.

 

He text me early the next morning to say thanks for a great night. We pinned down a plan for the next day. The next day he text to say he was hoping I was having a nice day.

 

We went later that day. Again, nice night. He said he liked me, and wanted to continue seeing me. Spent the night together (his suggestion), and fooled around, hugged while sleeping etc. He slept pretty late, then stayed, ate something, chatted a bit for a couple hours, then had to go. It was a little more awkward in the morning, but not too bad.

 

When he was leaving, nothing about a next date was mentioned (he's working nights all next week). No proper kiss, just a peck on the lips, and he said, 'I'll text you."

 

In the time between leaving here and now (couple of hours) he's been online.

 

Would you expect to hear from this man? Did he just want to mess around, or has that put him off somehow? Really confused, as that wasn't the vibe I got, but his leaving, and not arranging another date etc was quite low-key.

[nescafe1982]

My advice? Don't get so hooked on a guy you've gone out with twice. This is something women do almost naturally: they meet a man, they like that man, they seek intimacy/exclusivity. That freaks men out in the early stages. Rather than checking out his online profile and worrying about "what his text means," book yourself a couple more dates with other dudes you've been chatting.

 

Early stage dating is a numbers game. Date 2-3 men at once, and don't see any one dude more than once weekly. This gives them (and you!) time to process your developing feelings without over-committing too early. Men know Dating is about numbers, so they date around until they are serious. The best way to get the most out of your online-dating experience is to meet as many men as possible, and to keep yourself too busy to worry about whether or not he'll call.

 

As for the issue of the text: either he'll text, or he won't. Please, please don't think about "what you did to put him off" if he doesn't text you. If he reaches out, it's because he wants to keep dating. If he doesn't reach out, it's because he doesn't. But that doesn't negate you or anything you did... so talk a breath and get out there to meet yourself a couple more guys!

[desperategirl]

My advice? Don't get so hooked on a guy you've gone out with twice. This is something women do almost naturally: they meet a man, they like that man, they seek intimacy/exclusivity. That freaks men out in the early stages. Rather than checking out his online profile and worrying about "what his text means," book yourself a couple more dates with other dudes you've been chatting.

 

Early stage dating is a numbers game. Date 2-3 men at once, and don't see any one dude more than once weekly. This gives them (and you!) time to process your developing feelings without over-committing too early. Men know Dating is about numbers, so they date around until they are serious. The best way to get the most out of your online-dating experience is to meet as many men as possible, and to keep yourself too busy to worry about whether or not he'll call.

 

As for the issue of the text: either he'll text, or he won't. Please, please don't think about "what you did to put him off" if he doesn't text you. If he reaches out, it's because he wants to keep dating. If he doesn't reach out, it's because he doesn't. But that doesn't negate you or anything you did... so talk a breath and get out there to meet yourself a couple more guys!

 

Thanks so much for your reply. The thing is, I am interested in WHY someone might go from hot to cold.

 

I will continue to date (although I don't know how many more first dates I can handle!) but I'm interested in learning from my experiences.

 

Thanks again.

[nescafe1982]

The thing is, I am interested in WHY someone might go from hot to cold.

 

This is a fool's errand IMHO. There are thousands of reasons that a man might go from hot to cold; most of them have nothing to do with you. For example:

 

1) He's dating someone else who he's gotten more serious with;

2) He's dating other women and will get back to you in a few days;

3) He's resolved that he's not feeling attached/attracted/chemistry with you;

4) he's told you he'll text because that's a lot nicer than saying, "yeah, I'm just not feeling it."

5) He's been abducted by aliens and is being probed right this very minute.

6) He's working too much for a relationship;

 

etc, etc, etc.

 

I guess my point is that fretting over why men we go out with once or twice have stopped texting/calling is a recipe for crazy-making. Chances are it has nothing to do with you or your innate awesomeness. It's hard to put blinders on, I understand... but I'd wholly advise against asking "why" at this early stage. If he texts, then you consider whether to go out with him again. If he doesn't, oh well, on to the next!

 

Happy Hunting!

[kaylan]

"Ill text you" means "ill text you". Stop behaving like your username and date around. Its no biggie. Dont wait up on someone youve only been out with twice.

[desperategirl]

This is a fool's errand IMHO. There are thousands of reasons that a man might go from hot to cold; most of them have nothing to do with you. For example:

 

1) He's dating someone else who he's gotten more serious with;

2) He's dating other women and will get back to you in a few days;

3) He's resolved that he's not feeling attached/attracted/chemistry with you;

4) he's told you he'll text because that's a lot nicer than saying, "yeah, I'm just not feeling it."

5) He's been abducted by aliens and is being probed right this very minute.

6) He's working too much for a relationship;

 

etc, etc, etc.

 

I guess my point is that fretting over why men we go out with once or twice have stopped texting/calling is a recipe for crazy-making. Chances are it has nothing to do with you or your innate awesomeness. It's hard to put blinders on, I understand... but I'd wholly advise against asking "why" at this early stage. If he texts, then you consider whether to go out with him again. If he doesn't, oh well, on to the next!

 

Happy Hunting!

 

Thanks again. Just want to confirm (and sorry cause this kind of goes against what you're saying, but I'm curious) do you think that saying, "I'll etx you," probably means, "I'm not interested?"

 

I'm curious as I've just got back into the dating game, and I've at first been taking men and what they say at face-value. If someone said that before, I'd think they were going to text, and I'd wait. I'm interested to know, if, within the context, that means that they probably won't text.

 

It's just weird how he was last night, then having spent all night with me, said he'd text, rather than making plans. So basically, he's not met anyone else etc, as he was with me the whole time.

 

I'm actually not sure how much I would even want a relationshop with him, although I obviuosly enjoy his company and find him attractive.

 

Just interested to know how others would interpret his behaviour.

 

Thanks.

[desperategirl]

"Ill text you" means "ill text you". Stop behaving like your username and date around. Its no biggie. Dont wait up on someone youve only been out with twice.

 

I picked that stupid username during a low point, and it's been haunting me since! Seriously considering opening a new account to get away from it!

 

Thanks for your reply. I appreciate what you're saying, it's just I had to ask because it seems quite hard to take what men say at face-value sometimes.

[clia]

Do I have the timeline right?

 

Wednesday you exchange a couple messages.

Thursday is date one.

Saturday is date two, and he suggests spending the night together, which you do, but no sex.

 

This sounds like a guy looking for a quick hookup over the weekend. The timeline just seems so fast. I think allowing him to stay at your place was a bad idea, and I think all the last minute dates were a bad idea. But, what's done is done.

 

I could be wrong, though. You were there so you are the best one to gage his level of interest. I would expect to hear from him tomorrow or Tuesday if he is interested in going out again. I would not expect to hear from him today since you just saw him this morning. Only time will tell his true intentions.

[desperategirl]

Do I have the timeline right?

 

Wednesday you exchange a couple messages.

Thursday is date one.

Saturday is date two, and he suggests spending the night together, which you do, but no sex.

 

This sounds like a guy looking for a quick hookup over the weekend. The timeline just seems so fast. I think allowing him to stay at your place was a bad idea, and I think all the last minute dates were a bad idea. But, what's done is done.

 

I could be wrong, though. You were there so you are the best one to gage his level of interest. I would expect to hear from him tomorrow or Tuesday if he is interested in going out again. I would not expect to hear from him today since you just saw him this morning. Only time will tell his true intentions.

 

Hey,

 

Timeline almost right - messages exchanged wednesday, first date thursday, second date saturday.

 

Interesting about last minute dates. I kind of liked just going ahead and meeting someone, as it gets tedious to message back and forth. But I see what you're saying. I didn't get the impression of it being an attempt for a hook up from the beginning TBH. I'm just wondering now if spending the night put him off?

[clia]

I think the Thursday date was fine. I think it's good to meet online guys quickly to avoid building the false intimacy of lots of online messages before you even know if you have chemistry. So, that was fine. But the Saturday night date that led into a sleepover is where you might have gone wrong. Don't accept Saturday night dates at the last minute -- make plans in advance for Saturday nights so you don't have to lie about saying that you already have plans. Or if you are going to accept a last minute date, make it lunch, coffee, a drink before you head out to meet your friends, or something that isn't the prime time night of the week to be going out and involving the evening, a sleepover, and breakfast.

 

That said, I don't know that anything has "put him off" yet. It's too soon to tell. I would be shocked if you had heard from him again by now. The fact that he didn't immediately set up date three doesn't concern me yet either. If you haven't heard from him by Tuesday, though, consider him gone.

[nescafe1982]

Hey,

 

Timeline almost right - messages exchanged wednesday, first date thursday, second date saturday.

 

Interesting about last minute dates. I kind of liked just going ahead and meeting someone, as it gets tedious to message back and forth. But I see what you're saying. I didn't get the impression of it being an attempt for a hook up from the beginning TBH. I'm just wondering now if spending the night put him off?

 

Wow. Yeah, this timeline is really problematic (I didn't notice it before).

1) You spent LAST NIGHT together, and you're sweating not getting a text today?

2) You spent the night together on date 2, after knowing the guy for less than a week? I don't judge people on their sex lives, but it is dangerous to have a dude you've known only a couple days over to your place. I hope you're normally more careful than that.

 

If you didn't have sex and he doesn't text you in the future, then chalk it up to a dude who wanted to get laid, didn't, and has since written you off. And thank goodness: you don't sound like you want that kind of guy in the first place.

 

By being smarter about your boundaries in the future, you can avoid this kind of ambiguity while also attracting the right kind of man. But if I were in your shoes, I would seriously reevaluate your dating strategy.

[desperategirl]

I think the Thursday date was fine. I think it's good to meet online guys quickly to avoid building the false intimacy of lots of online messages before you even know if you have chemistry. So, that was fine. But the Saturday night date that led into a sleepover is where you might have gone wrong. Don't accept Saturday night dates at the last minute -- make plans in advance for Saturday nights so you don't have to lie about saying that you already have plans. Or if you are going to accept a last minute date, make it lunch, coffee, a drink before you head out to meet your friends, or something that isn't the prime time night of the week to be going out and involving the evening, a sleepover, and breakfast.

 

That said, I don't know that anything has "put him off" yet. It's too soon to tell. I would be shocked if you had heard from him again by now. The fact that he didn't immediately set up date three doesn't concern me yet either. If you haven't heard from him by Tuesday, though, consider him gone.

 

Thanks. I guess it's not so much that I haven't had a text yet (he only left a few hours ago!) but more that he didn't arrange a date before leaving. However, I think you're right about waiting until Tuesday. Then I'll consider it closed totally.

[desperategirl]

Wow. Yeah, this timeline is really problematic (I didn't notice it before).

1) You spent LAST NIGHT together, and you're sweating not getting a text today?

2) You spent the night together on date 2, after knowing the guy for less than a week? I don't judge people on their sex lives, but it is dangerous to have a dude you've known only a couple days over to your place. I hope you're normally more careful than that.

 

If you didn't have sex and he doesn't text you in the future, then chalk it up to a dude who wanted to get laid, didn't, and has since written you off. And thank goodness: you don't sound like you want that kind of guy in the first place.

 

By being smarter about your boundaries in the future, you can avoid this kind of ambiguity while also attracting the right kind of man. But if I were in your shoes, I would seriously reevaluate your dating strategy.

 

Hi, it does sound really bad. It didn't feel that terrible though. I also don't live alone though, so I guess it doesn't seem as dangerous to invite guys over as if I did live alone.

 

We didn't have sex (he didn't want to, as we didn't have protection. Of course I didn't either) but we fooled around, and he had a good time.

 

I guess I don't really have a dating strategy. God I find this stuff so complicated. I guess my dating strategy so far has been to follow my gut.

 

Hasn't worked out that well.

 

But yes, not expecting contact yet as he left a few hours ago, but just wondering if "I'll text you" is an obvious blow off.

[writergal]

Hey,

 

a little context: went on a date with a guy I met OLD - went out very quickly after exchanging a couple of messages (the next day) which I am cool with. Hate sending messages for ages, would rather meet up, see if there's anything there.

 

Went out, had a lovely night. He asked about second date during first, which he said was against the 'rules' (we were laughing about dating rules) but said he really liked me, so it was cool.

 

He text me early the next morning to say thanks for a great night. We pinned down a plan for the next day. The next day he text to say he was hoping I was having a nice day.

 

We went later that day. Again, nice night. He said he liked me, and wanted to continue seeing me. Spent the night together (his suggestion), and fooled around, hugged while sleeping etc. He slept pretty late, then stayed, ate something, chatted a bit for a couple hours, then had to go. It was a little more awkward in the morning, but not too bad.

 

When he was leaving, nothing about a next date was mentioned (he's working nights all next week). No proper kiss, just a peck on the lips, and he said, 'I'll text you."

 

In the time between leaving here and now (couple of hours) he's been online.

 

Would you expect to hear from this man? Did he just want to mess around, or has that put him off somehow? Really confused, as that wasn't the vibe I got, but his leaving, and not arranging another date etc was quite low-key.

 

So the only reason you two didnt have sex is because you didn't have a condom for protection?

 

No, you won't hear from this guy again unless he just wants to have sex with you.

 

I have to agree with the poster nescafe1982 that you have terrible interpersonal boundaries when it comes to dating men.

 

Do you prefer casual sex, one-night stands to taking the time to get to know a guy first before you sleep with each other? Is this a typical dating strategy for you, to have sex with a guy immediately after meeting him?

 

If you're in your 20s and just want to have casual sex encounters, what you did with this guy is the way to go. However, if you really want to be serious about dating, I think you have to change your expectations, and change your behavior.

 

Ultimately, no guy will respect you until you actually respect yourself. Your poor dating boundaries give off the message to men that you are okay with casual sex encounters, so they have no reason to invest any time with you beyond one night of sex. I hope this experience opened your eyes to what you need to do (work on yourself, it's not about the guys but about your expectations and your behavior) to change how you date.

[crude]

I'm always in awe at how the standard "he just wanted sex" is spoken no matter what the facts are. From what I've read on LS, most of the men fade or end the relationship before the 3rd, 4th, and 5th dates, just before they could get sex. They're passing on it, yet the posters here keep babbling about how he probably just wanted sex. Unreal.

[desperategirl]

So the only reason you two didnt have sex is because you didn't have a condom for protection?

 

Honestly, yes.

 

No, you won't hear from this guy again unless he just wants to have sex with you.

 

I have to agree with the poster nescafe1982 that you have terrible interpersonal boundaries when it comes to dating men.

 

Do you prefer casual sex, one-night stands to taking the time to get to know a guy first before you sleep with each other? Is this a typical dating strategy for you, to have sex with a guy immediately after meeting him?

 

Nope, never spent time like that with a guy so soon. Always wait a bit longer before sex. Just didn't seem like a terrible thing to do. We talked a lot, we'd clicked. I don't know, just seemed pretty normal, although, as I said, I wouldn't normally do it.

 

If you're in your 20s and just want to have casual sex encounters, what you did with this guy is the way to go. However, if you really want to be serious about dating, I think you have to change your expectations, and change your behavior.

As in a "rules" type of way?

 

Ultimately, no guy will respect you until you actually respect yourself. Your poor dating boundaries give off the message to men that you are okay with casual sex encounters, so they have no reason to invest any time with you beyond one night of sex. I hope this experience opened your eyes to what you need to do (work on yourself, it's not about the guys but about your expectations and your behavior) to change how you date.

 

But doesn't that just make the assumption that every guy always only wants sex? And is that the case? I have literally no idea.

 

Thanks for your reply.

[desperategirl]

I'm always in awe at how the standard "he just wanted sex" is spoken no matter what the facts are. From what I've read on LS, most of the men fade or end the relationship before the 3rd, 4th, and 5th dates, just before they could get sex. They're passing on it, yet the posters here keep babbling about how he probably just wanted sex. Unreal.

 

Are you a guy? How do you feel about the assumption that guys just want sex?

 

I had always assumed that with holding sex won't make a guy like you if he doesn't, and having sex won't make him not like you if he does. Seems like that may not be the case though.

 

What do you think?

[nescafe1982]

I'm always in awe at how the standard "he just wanted sex" is spoken no matter what the facts are. From what I've read on LS, most of the men fade or end the relationship before the 3rd, 4th, and 5th dates, just before they could get sex. They're passing on it, yet the posters here keep babbling about how he probably just wanted sex. Unreal.

 

Point taken, but in this case the OP is inviting that kind of guy into her life. Which is fine, so long as sex is all she wants too. But it sounds like she wants more than that for herself. Which means that she will need to learn to set boundaries/expectations with the men she meets.

 

Fact is, there are lots of guys who just want sex. It's cliche for a reason.

[nescafe1982]

I had always assumed that with holding sex won't make a guy like you if he doesn't, and having sex won't make him not like you if he does. Seems like that may not be the case though.

 

I think you're right. But having sex with a guy before he's had time to appraise whether or not he likes you is a surefire way to kill any potential for romantic love.

 

Sort of like dumping lots of water on a seedling will kill it.

[desperategirl]

I think you're right. But having sex with a guy before he's had time to appraise whether or not he likes you is a surefire way to kill any potential for romantic love.

 

Sort of like dumping lots of water on a seedling will kill it.

 

Ok...so I'm almost embarrassed at how naive this sounds...but it seemed like he did like me, and he SAID he did (possibly lying to get what he wanted, right?)

 

He said he wanted to keep seeing me. This was well before he came over. That's why I'm wondering if he was lying, or whether having him over did make him not like me.

 

Or option c, whether he does like me, and the "I'll text you" line is not a blow-off.

[crude]

I think you're right. But having sex with a guy before he's had time to appraise whether or not he likes you is a surefire way to kill any potential for romantic love.

 

Sort of like dumping lots of water on a seedling will kill it.

 

The thing is , people here post 1930's dating about about "easy and he won't respect you" stuff, cliches. How could anyone post that a guy wanted sex, didn't get it, so he's gone, when he could've had it, didn't bring condoms, and didn't go get any condoms. Instead he cuddled all night. He basically turned down sex. I'm a man, don't particularly want sex with a stranger, but don't think the date when you do have sex affects much of anything. Victorian double standards really aren't what they used to be.

[BluEyeL]

I don't know if this guy will text you (might, but this relationship is doome IMO), but I think by letting him come to your place on the second date, even if you didn't sleep with him, you kinda ruined your chances. No idea what's gonna happen with this one but in the future, if you are looking for LTR please do not, and I repeat, do not have dates in any place other than public places for as long as it takes to really make sure that the guy you like likes you the same way, has good character, and is LTR material. If you don't follow this religiously, it's going to take forever, and a lot of trouble until you find a good relationship. Enough said. Don't care about what others will say, if a LTR is what you want, this is the only way to go, give time to grow emotional intimacy, otherwise the guys will bolt more often than not. Even if you don't have sex but just fool around. They get tired/bored of/with you, you are no challenge, and they don't fall for you as they should for someone who is their dream girl.

[desperategirl]

The thing is , people here post 1930's dating about about "easy and he won't respect you" stuff, cliches. How could anyone post that a guy wanted sex, didn't get it, so he's gone, when he could've had it, didn't bring condoms, and didn't go get any condoms. Instead he cuddled all night. He basically turned down sex. I'm a man, don't particularly want sex with a stranger, but don't think the date when you do have sex affects much of anything. Victorian double standards really aren't what they used to be.

 

Thanks. INteresting to get another point of view. I don't believe that all men just want sex, or at least, it seems depressing to think that, and seems that you'd be baiting them/tricking them into a LTR by using sex as a weapon all the time if that were the case.

[BluEyeL]

Is not that they just want sex, is that they are not falling for you if they get you into bed (even just for making out) very quickly. There is not build up, no mystery, no challenge, you turn them off. Or many of them. What's the mad rush to get all sexual? Get to know them as people first, build some emotional initmacy, some longing, some desire.

[nescafe1982]

Victorian double standards really aren't what they used to be.

 

Calling it old-fashioned doesn't really cut the mustard. Sorry. No one is saying that it's morally wrong to sleep over/have sex with someone you've known for 4 days. I'm saying it's not a recipe for finding a keeper.

 

It's also not a double standard. Men who have sex with a woman they've known for four days will also find themselves attracting mostly women after sex, and not a real, bonified love connection.

 

Sex matters. To dismiss its importance doesn't make you "modern," pro-women, or feminist; it makes you jaded.