I dislike how effective playing hard to get is

[SevenCity]

The cycle.

 

Easy to get (scarcity) --> pretending to be hard to get (learned game) --> actually being hard to get (abundance).

 

I find that women have neurotic love. They want the man with options (and every sort of display that he has them, or can cultivate them), and then they want to cut off his options (or enforce that he neither has them, nor can create them).

 

You forgot to add: the woman will lose interest if she is successful with eliminating his options.

[Wave Rider]

I know exactly what you're talking about, and it's exasperating. They're interested in you as long as they can't have you, but as soon as you become available, they lose interest. Then you show someone you really like them and they act very bored and turned off, then you call it quits and decide you don't want them anymore, and suddenly they're really interested!

 

I think there are two things going on here:

 

1) Fear of intimacy and commitment. Unavailable people are appealing to commitment-phobes and intimacy-phobes because it give them the sense that they have a connection with someone without forcing them to face their fears of intimacy and commitment. To an intimacy-phobe, an available and interested person is a very frightening thing indeed!

 

2) Ester Perel wrote a great book called "Mating in Captivity" where she says that erotic desire is often in conflict with companionate love, because love is about appreciating what you have, while erotic desire is about wanting what you don't have. She says that it's quite a challenge to get both needs met by the same person, which is what our expectation of romantic partnership is these days. It's a hard balance between being available enough to be good supportive partner, but being unavailable enough to be romantically desirable. It's a very difficult thing that most people don't do very well at.

 

The push-pull totally sucks because you can never have an actual relationship, because either they're running away from you or you're running away from them.

Edited September 4, 2017 by Wave Rider

[bluefeather]

I don't get any of that. I don't really play games in that way. For me, it's just, "when are you available?" and that's pretty much it. And if I'm asking you out, I've already thought ahead to make time for you. So there's no bait and switch. Soo I dunno what guys you're talking with, but that ain't all of us. But for you, why get turned off if one day the guy is extra available? We're not some goods of economics to increase/decrease in value based on supply and demand. :S

 

/confusion

 

It's actually a bit of a turn-off for me when women seem too unavailable. Sometimes that just comes off as a busy-body, workaholic, or just not that interested in me, in which case, I'll stop wasting my time.

[The Urbanyst]

Playing hard to get is very effective, but it also makes people hate you. That is the paradox. Studies have shown this too.

 

So you have to set priorities. Do you care more about losing the upper hand but being more loved/liked or do you care more about being in control and having your partner dream about revenge fantasies?

 

I despise women who play hard to get. I make it a point to never call them after we finally have sex lol.

[SevenCity]

Playing hard to get is very effective, but it also makes people hate you. That is the paradox. Studies have shown this too.

 

So you have to set priorities. Do you care more about losing the upper hand but being more loved/liked or do you care more about being in control and having your partner dream about revenge fantasies?

 

I despise women who play hard to get. I make it a point to never call them after we finally have sex lol.

 

Ha ha ha lololololz

[Woggle]

Having had a casual relationship with a woman where all I wanted was casual I have seen the effect being unavailable has on some women but I wouldn't want a woman like that anyway because want what you can't have syndrome has nothing to do with love. The woman I am talking about would have went to Vegas right there and eloped with me but I just lost interest.

[Vyliss]

I've seen girls do it well and girls who don't do it at all, and after asking my partner about this. It does seem like It works extremely well to KEEP a man's attention. (Whether he'll admit to liking games or not)

 

The girls who don't do it at all are often the ones chasing, or dumped, or have passionless relationships.

 

Push/pull/games is not always appropriate but it has its place.

 

I naturally do this, and all my bfs have appreciated it. For one... I know how to keep the spark and all bfs I've had fell very fast for me. It's not like I'm manipulating men for mean reasons or to hurt men. It's just that when women do it well, they can keep the spark easily and their men are always deeply in love and infatuated. Things never get 'boring' shall we say. But yea, you need honesty, respect and other stuff too.

 

I've found guys who didn't play a little hard to get a bit boring and desperate too. It's human nature to want to work for and therefore better appreciate things that are not easy to obtain.

[CptInsano]

I've seen girls do it well and girls who don't do it at all, and after asking my partner about this. It does seem like It works extremely well to KEEP a man's attention. (Whether he'll admit to liking games or not)

 

I wouldn't agree on this one. There is a subset of men who go really go for this. Others will like it initially, then tire of it quickly. Yet others don't respond at all, or move on during the first or second push.

 

But I also believe that those who like to play this game are very much drawn to each other.

[nospam99]

It's human nature to want to work for and therefore better appreciate things that are not easy to obtain.

 

Then I guess I'm not human. I appreciate things, including relationships, for their features and/or inherent value. While I have no problem working (hard) to get or achieve something I want, something of value that 'falls in my lap' is of no less value because it was easy to obtain. Given multiple options of similar value, I may very well select the one(s) to pursue based on less work being required. Perhaps it's human nature to be lazy?

Edited September 5, 2017 by nospam99

[elaine567]

I do not think anyone can generalise.

CptInsano is correct, it is all about subsets.

Certain dating "tricks" attract certain types of people and repel others.

 

The more extreme manipulative tricks may "work", but the problem then is who have they actually attracted?

Usually it is the dysfunctional, the hurt, the broken, the "wounded animals", the desperate, the ones hooked on drama, the abusers, the mentally ill, those too naive or "stupid" to say no... etc

 

Too many get stuck in the same patterns of dating.

They throw out the same bait and get the same fish biting time after time and then wonder what they did to deserve that...

[SevenCity]

I've seen girls do it well and girls who don't do it at all, and after asking my partner about this. It does seem like It works extremely well to KEEP a man's attention. (Whether he'll admit to liking games or not)

 

The girls who don't do it at all are often the ones chasing, or dumped, or have passionless relationships.

 

Push/pull/games is not always appropriate but it has its place.

 

I naturally do this, and all my bfs have appreciated it. For one... I know how to keep the spark and all bfs I've had fell very fast for me. It's not like I'm manipulating men for mean reasons or to hurt men. It's just that when women do it well, they can keep the spark easily and their men are always deeply in love and infatuated. Things never get 'boring' shall we say. But yea, you need honesty, respect and other stuff too.

 

I've found guys who didn't play a little hard to get a bit boring and desperate too. It's human nature to want to work for and therefore better appreciate things that are not easy to obtain.

 

Why did these relationships end? Did you lose interest in them?

[Chilli]

Yeah l dunno , all this talk of games and tricks, push pull l mean wtfk that's bs, not what l was sayin earlier.

Do people really do all this bs these days.

All gf meant was, well for lack of knowing just how to explain it but you could sorta say in a trust thing, before giving her heart, her all, jumping in the sack,things like that.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Chilli

[Redhead14]

It's not about Playing hard to get, it's about actually being hard to get -- having a busy, active, fulfilling life that doesn't revolve around getting dates and finding a relationship.

 

If you have a rich, fulfilling life on your own, then a guy will actually need to work to get into your schedule and demonstrate that he is "worthy" of you making him a priority.

 

Playing hard to get works, maybe, but the truth comes out somewhere along the line that you aren't as difficult to get as you made it seem . . .

[Gaeta]

People 'playing hard to get' are not genuinely interested in the other person.

 

Some couples will endlessly play hard to get with each other and where does it go? Nowhere, because no one really want it to go somewhere.

 

When I meet someone, and I know most normal human beings are like this, when we meet someone we really are interested in getting to know we don't play games! It's practically impossible! We're too afraid of sending the wrong signal and lose our chance with that person. People that are genuinely interested will 'be themselves'.

[GunslingerRoland]

I think it's an individual thing personally, I was always drawn to women who were actually really into me. A woman who was lukewarm towards me, hard to get, wasn't very appealing.

 

I can see how for people who can get almost anyone they want, the ones who they don't throw themselves at you, bring some intrigue though.

[The Urbanyst]

It's not about Playing hard to get, it's about actually being hard to get -- having a busy, active, fulfilling life that doesn't revolve around getting dates and finding a relationship.

 

If you have a rich, fulfilling life on your own, then a guy will actually need to work to get into your schedule and demonstrate that he is "worthy" of you making him a priority.

 

Playing hard to get works, maybe, but the truth comes out somewhere along the line that you aren't as difficult to get as you made it seem . . .

 

A woman who doesn't make relationships a priority is not worth the hassle. I have a life too and I'm busy too. I don't have time to jump through hoops to prove I'm "worthy" as if you're royalty lol.

 

If you care more about your career and your friends.. then go do that and I'll date someone more enthusiastic.

[knabe]

basically, this is just the dysfunctional, insecurity-driven coping mechanism of those with low emotional intelligence.

 

Healthy people don't have to play games.

[SevenCity]

A woman who doesn't make relationships a priority is not worth the hassle. I have a life too and I'm busy too. I don't have time to jump through hoops to prove I'm "worthy" as if you're royalty lol.

 

If you care more about your career and your friends.. then go do that and I'll date someone more enthusiastic.

 

Amen! I have zero interest in playing second fiddle for any woman.

 

This is exactly why I don't date women with kids - you are almost always an afterthought.

 

I make time and space in my life for girls I like and I expect the same. I don't date girls who aren't excited to see me - it is much more fun and fulfilling when they can't wait to see you. I lose interest very quickly for girls who are "meh" about me.

[Sweetfish]

 

 

I read time and time and time again how so and so is 'perfect' but the relationship is just too easy. And people typically refer to this as nice guy/nice girl syndrome. Except nice is a scapegoat. It's not really the nice, but that lack of challenge.

 

 

Its not a scapegoat

 

It appears its hard for you to admit you are not attracted to nice guys and some guys do not like nice girls it goes both ways.

 

 

Some guys/girls are introverts and no we do not don't want a challenge we want to get to know you and if you want to be a part of our lives we will open our schedule for you. Many introverts value a connection.. so no you will not be met with a challenge

 

 

I think even you your self are questioning why are you not attracted to these guys.. But I am assuming like always

[Timshel]

Amen! I have zero interest in playing second fiddle for any woman.

 

This is exactly why I don't date women with kids - you are almost always an afterthought.

 

I make time and space in my life for girls I like and I expect the same. I don't date girls who aren't excited to see me - it is much more fun and fulfilling when they can't wait to see you. I lose interest very quickly for girls who are "meh" about me.

 

OMG!! Me too!! The other day, my woman friend cancelled a get together because her son was sick..ziatch

 

Then, when I met for a woman's lunch, none of them were super excited to see me..it was hey, hug...boooring.

 

Then, believe it or not, my daughter had a friend sleep over and her friend was soooo 'meh' about hamburger or hot dog. Nerve.

 

In dating, people have a chemistry/interest or they quibble. Being particular is good.

I have never witnessed any game playing between two people who are truly interested in each other.

 

It may be the point is mute for connections that flow.

[Bastile]

basically, this is just the dysfunctional, insecurity-driven coping mechanism of those with low emotional intelligence.

 

Healthy people don't have to play games.

 

This is cliched backlash, and game denial.

 

Emotional intelligence allows for the fact that human beings are complicated, and don't necessarily exist within your rigid code of conduct...

[Redhead14]

A woman who doesn't make relationships a priority is not worth the hassle. I have a life too and I'm busy too. I don't have time to jump through hoops to prove I'm "worthy" as if you're royalty lol.

 

If you care more about your career and your friends.. then go do that and I'll date someone more enthusiastic.

 

I will make a relationship one of my priorities, if the guy indicates he's serious about that with me. Until, that happens, I'm living my life not worrying about having a relationship even if I really, really want one. If I like him enough and he is respecting my time, being upfront about his dating goals and dating me in a way that demonstrates that, I'm all in. I will make time for him even if I'm really, really busy.

 

A guy doesn't have to jump through hoops, all he needs to do is schedule proper dates, and show that his interest is sincere and he communicates honestly and regularly.

 

I care more about my career and friends and family until I get clarity from the guy, then I care about him too.

 

I'm not going to care about a guy who doesn't know what he wants, can't be bothered to schedule proper dates, isn't consistent in his approach, doesn't keep in good touch.

 

It's not about being royalty, is about observing that there is respect and sincerity before I start rearranging my life for him.

[SevenCity]

OMG!! Me too!! The other day, my woman friend cancelled a get together because her son was sick..ziatch

 

Then, when I met for a woman's lunch, none of them were super excited to see me..it was hey, hug...boooring.

 

Then, believe it or not, my daughter had a friend sleep over and her friend was soooo 'meh' about hamburger or hot dog. Nerve.

 

In dating, people have a chemistry/interest or they quibble. Being particular is good.

I have never witnessed any game playing between two people who are truly interested in each other.

 

It may be the point is mute for connections that flow.

 

Sarcasm aside, almost 90% or the women's profiles I read state "My kids are my world and will always come first". Translation "You will always come second".

 

When I am serious about a woman SHE comes first. Even if we were to marry and have kids she would still be the priority. That's what I expect and what I am willing to give.

 

Hence, why I don't date women with kids.

 

I've heard similar complaints from women dating guys who have kids. Starting off in second (or 3rd, or 4th) place at the beginning of a relationship does not end well.

 

Not to mention all the ex husband drama and the fact they have to plan everything in advance for coverage. Nothing wrong with them, just not for me.

[knabe]

This is cliched backlash, and game denial.

 

Emotional intelligence allows for the fact that human beings are complicated, and don't necessarily exist within your rigid code of conduct...

 

My point is that those who intentionally play games are emotionally immature. Because they are. They may cloak it in "playah" swagger or "princess" attitude...but the bottom line is that emotionally intelligent people do not choose to be manipulative or deceptive to hide their insecurities. It's not a "rigid code of conduct." It's just the way it is.

 

And it is also almost always coupled with a disdain for the opposite sex (even though they want to get into the opposite sex's pants).

[bluefeather]

Woh, when did this turn into a discussion about people with kids?

 

It may be the point is mute for connections that flow.

 

The word is MOOT. Not mute. You can't have a mute point.