playing easy to get

[Mish]

When a men persists in asking a girl out, it shows devotion and it shows to the girl, he is serious about her. In this modern era where men just "picks up" girls everywhere in the street and wants to "add a notch to his bedposts", you don't know who is serious and who is not.

That's true, but there are other ways to find out whether the guy is serious or not apart from continuously rejecting his invitations. I would actually say that the guy who persists after being told no has a lot more chances being only after one thing because he is driven by a questionable (physical?) obsession over someone he doesn't really know, where as a guy a who doesn't persist genuinely wants to get to know the girl as a person, but doesn't want to be rude by persisting if the girl is not interested.

I'm ofcourse speaking from experience, asking girls out who show interest to be told a maybe several times in a row. That's not a turn on in any way shape or form. Girls like that just appear flaky and uncertain about what they want.

[carl1222]

The last "What do the other females in this forum think? Am I the only one who isn't even slightly annoyed by a persistent guy?" is an actual question in search of the opinion of other female LF posters. Not a rhetorical self-promoting one.

You're posting in a general forum. If you are specifically looking for more female responses, you should post in the "Ask a Female" forum. Guys still will answer there, but you will get more female responses.

I don't mean guys who are doormats and put aside everything in his life for a girl. I mean guys who persists in asking out a girl even when she says no the first few times.

Understood, but my long discussion of Doormats was mainly for Reath's benefit. Don't forget, I also included "Players" in the over-persistent men category. For a player, persistent chasing is not only part of the game, it IS the game!

I don't know what you mean by the confident modern men who sees women as people, not prizes to be won.

When i say "modern, I mean post-sexual revolution, post-new feminist movement men. Prior to the 1960s, "run and chase" was the normal social custom. Since then, that custom has been substantially eroded. As a consquence, most confident desirable men see it not only as just a game, but an obsolete one at that ... so they opt out, preferring to find a woman to be with (a person) rather than a woman to win (a prize).

I think all women would be flattered to have a guy see her as valuable enough for the persistent chasing. And I know the guy who I will be serious with will have to meet that criteria.

You're not looking for a relationship, you're looking for an ego cookie!

When a men persists in asking a girl out, it shows devotion and it shows to the girl, he is serious about her. In this modern era where men just "picks up" girls everywhere in the street and wants to "add a notch to his bedposts", you don't know who is serious and who is not.

I think you are reading way too much into the man's motivation. How is persistence an indicator of "devotion" (except in the case of a doormat)? I think it's dangerous to assume that repeated turn downs will discourage players. A skillful player will feign "devotion" to make his conquest. Persistence is at the very top of his bag of tricks.

Carl.

[boobaa]

I don't mind being complimented. I agree it takes balls for a guy to approach a woman, especially nowadays. I can't tell you anything about falling for them. Tho I suppose my husband was persistent back in our dating days, now I think about it.

I just found it amusing you chose to phrase it as a way to distinguish yourself from other females. That self-psych is as old as the hills.

A lot of young girls don't realize that guys actually see this "wanting to be different" state, and it can be used.

[Gigabitch]

The last guy that played easy to get with me was a total player. He chased me like a dog after a rabbit for six months and dumped me flat after he finally got into my pants. Later, I found out I was one of very, very many who'd had the same experience with him.

He was a wolf in Golden Retriever's clothing.

Because of this, I'd be wary of a guy like that. If he turned out to be the real thing, I'd worry constantly that he was like that with everyone.

I make things difficult for myself.

Anyway, long story short, I prefer someone more reserved who appears to be careful about who he involves himself with. Then I want that person to choose me.

[IndiReloaded]

The last guy that played easy to get with me was a total player. He chased me like a dog after a rabbit for six months and dumped me flat after he finally got into my pants. Later, I found out I was one of very, very many who'd had the same experience with him.

Was he at least good in the sack? Or a dud that way too?

[Gigabitch]

Technically speaking, he was skilled, but he was a crappy kisser and there was no real intimacy, just ****ing. I hated it.

[lastwish]

When i say "modern, I mean post-sexual revolution, post-new feminist movement men. Prior to the 1960s, "run and chase" was the normal social custom. Since then, that custom has been substantially eroded. As a consquence, most confident desirable men see it not only as just a game, but an obsolete one at that ... so they opt out, preferring to find a woman to be with (a person) rather than a woman to win (a prize).

I know what you mean by modern men. I should've used quotations.

What do you mean by wanting to be with a "person" rather then to win a "prize"?

I think you are reading way too much into the man's motivation. How is persistence an indicator of "devotion" (except in the case of a doormat)? I think it's dangerous to assume that repeated turn downs will discourage players. A skillful player will feign "devotion" to make his conquest. Persistence is at the very top of his bag of tricks.

Carl.

I would think a player will get so many dates, he does not need to feign devotion. He wouldn't have the time of day since he has so many girls to juggle. A player will probably be more unavailable then to be present.

[Gigabitch]

A player is interested in getting what he wants as fast as he can. If apparent devotion results in you on your back, why wouldn't he employ such an easy tactic?

[carl1222]

I would think a player will get so many dates, he does not need to feign devotion. He wouldn't have the time of day since he has so many girls to juggle. A player will probably be more unavailable then to be present.

I don't think you understand the player's psyche. A committed player has no use for an "easy" girl because she doesn't provide him with the challenge that reaffirms his skill and irresistabilty. So the perfect target for a player is a girl like you who falls for his bullsh*t lines because she mistakenly equates persistence and attention with commitment and devotion. As Giga said, the inevitable unhappy ending with a player is that all his nice words and persistance evaporate when he gets you to agree to have sex with him. That's his end-game.

Carl.

[lastwish]

I would think that employing a game of unavailability will be easier than a game of apparent devotion.

[lastwish]

I don't think you understand the player's psyche. A committed player has no use for an "easy" girl because she doesn't provide him with the challenge that reaffirms his skill and irresistabilty. So the perfect target for a player is a girl like you who falls for his bullsh*t lines because she mistakenly equates persistence and attention with commitment and devotion. As Giga said, the inevitable unhappy ending with a player is that all his nice words and persistance evaporate when he gets you to agree to have sex with him. That's his end-game.

Carl.

Have you been a player Carl?

[Gigabitch]

I would think that employing a game of unavailability will be easier than a game of apparent devotion.

Not if it gets you nowhere near the honey pot. Here's the thing, too: players don't seem to be satisfied just getting laid. They want you to LIKE them. They want you to care. Then they want to drop you on your ass. They get off on it.

Hence, the Easy To Get routine. It makes girls like them.

[carl1222]

I would think that employing a game of unavailability will be easier than a game of apparent devotion.

It can be, but I didn't mention that because it didn't apply to your question.

A different kind of player, the "bad boy" player uses the strategy you mentioned. By affecting (or by nature) the image of a sexy (dark, loner, animalistic) but disinterested guy, the bad boy player can attract the substantial number of unfortunate women who find it exciting to have sex with a guy who promises nothing beyond a raw sexual experience.

The girls who go for this are expressing their "inner whore" I suppose ... they like to be "taken" for primal sex. I don't know which type of playing is easier to pull off. The regular player has to do a lot more work, but the bad boy player needs a lot of animal magnetism and charisma.

Carl.

[carl1222]

Have you been a player Carl?

Nahhh ... players are basically insecure, that's why they need constant confirmation of their sexiness and skills to be happy.

I've always found sex for sex's sake to be pretty hollow and meaningless.

Carl.