Women have to feel THIS...

[sosuave213]

They have to feel like they're going to lose you.

In the opposite case, where the men feels like they're going to lose her, the man sends too many texts, comes off too strong and doesn't let the woman's feelings develop.

If the woman is missing you, it just means she doesn't want to lose you to another gal. She knows this is a possibility from the social value you've demonstrated via conversations: Confidence, dominance and charm.

This is the so-called "connection" they require.

 

[BeExcellent]

Advice from the old lady:

Hmmmm. Not exactly. Depends on who you are dealing with. For your average insecure girl whose value & options are inferior to yours? Perhaps. Maybe she’ll chase, but you’ll find her boring soon & you’ll look elsewhere. That cycle then further damages her self esteem and may become a relationship pattern for her….

Me? If I felt a man didn’t have enough interest in me (which was very unusual), I lost interest in him entirely. Why? Because why on Earth would I want someone who is unwilling to invest in me or show interest in me? No thank you. I cannot desire someone who doesn’t want/desire me. Lack of attention does not make me want him more, rather it tells me he’s not a good match. So I dropped those guys quickly & accepted dates from others. If Mr. Can’t be Bothered suddenly comes back around seeking me out? Sorry Charlie, that ship has sailed & you missed your opportunity.

But I am a very secure, self confident woman who knows her value. Why would I put up with breadcrumbs when I can enjoy the full meal with someone of equal or greater value than the guy trying to leave breadcrumbs?

No desirable person with options will tolerate that. You guys should not tolerate it as a man and you should not expect quality sought after women to tolerate it either.

Everything depends on the type of girl you are dealing with. It’s not a universal thing, it’s just not.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Advice from the old lady:

Hmmmm. Not exactly. Depends on who you are dealing with. For your average insecure girl whose value & options are inferior to yours? Perhaps. Maybe she’ll chase, but you’ll find her boring soon & you’ll look elsewhere. That cycle then further damages her self esteem and may become a relationship pattern for her….

Me? If I felt a man didn’t have enough interest in me (which was very unusual), I lost interest in him entirely. Why? Because why on Earth would I want someone who is unwilling to invest in me or show interest in me? No thank you. I cannot desire someone who doesn’t want/desire me. Lack of attention does not make me want him more, rather it tells me he’s not a good match. So I dropped those guys quickly & accepted dates from others. If Mr. Can’t be Bothered suddenly comes back around seeking me out? Sorry Charlie, that ship has sailed & you missed your opportunity.

But I am a very secure, self confident woman who knows her value. Why would I put up with breadcrumbs when I can enjoy the full meal with someone of equal or greater value than the guy trying to leave breadcrumbs?

No desirable person with options will tolerate that. You guys should not tolerate it as a man and you should not expect quality sought after women to tolerate it either.

Everything depends on the type of girl you are dealing with. It’s not a universal thing, it’s just not.

This idea stems from men who have acted needy/desperate in the past who are trying to not come off that way to women which in most cases is even more off putting than not showing interest.

There is a difference between showing interest and acting needy/desperate tho. Too many guys walk on the wrong side of that and that is part of the reason why many tend to try to limit their interactions.

My view is that if you aren't needy or desperate than texting her or not isn't going to make a difference because your communication won't come off that way. But that's just me. I tend to text/communicate with women I date more than most. Typically a few texts a day back and forth.

Some don't realize that there is an in between with texting hardly at all and texting 24/7 all day. Seemingly many think it's got to be either one or the other. I tend to think there is a happy medium somewhere in between and that fits in there.

However, what works for me, may not work for others, so I guess it all depends on the individual...

But as far as "why" guys try to show less interest, that's why.

 

[BeExcellent]

Agreed. One of my player friends who is exceptionally good at text and banter is exceptionally good at it precisely because he is utterly outcome independent. He may send long texts, short texts, he is never formulaic and he does exactly what he wants, communicates when and as often as he wants, etc. but he’s never needy or desperate.

I think the thing men need to learn often is social attenuation. Too many guys here think if X then Y and almost look at interactions with women like an algebra equation with a set of rigid rules governing the outcome and that just isn’t how human interactions are.

So yes I get your point. It’s hard to help people who don’t realize they are missing the social cues understand that. I know many of us are trying, but to me it stems from binary thinking when there is a whole plethora of possibilities in between as you note.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Agreed. One of my player friends who is exceptionally good at text and banter is exceptionally good at it precisely because he is utterly outcome independent. He may send long texts, short texts, he is never formulaic and he does exactly what he wants, communicates when and as often as he wants, etc. but he’s never needy or desperate.

I think the thing men need to learn often is social attenuation. Too many guys here think if X then Y and almost look at interactions with women like an algebra equation with a set of rigid rules governing the outcome and that just isn’t how human interactions are.

So yes I get your point. It’s hard to help people who don’t realize they are missing the social cues understand that. I know many of us are trying, but to me it stems from binary thinking when there is a whole plethora of possibilities in between as you note.

Well, to be fair, women are confusing to guys because we don't think like they do or at least not in the way that they do.

The thing that I think has helped me the most is simply to realize that a lot of women, especially the attractive ones, have so many options that they actively and passively seek out ways to disqualify men early on to help them focus on ones that don't "fail the easy tests".

Even if they aren't doing this intentionally in their mind, this is what ends up happening in actuality.

Kinda like how some jobs will give assessments to help disqualify candidates as well. I mean if you are looking for a math teacher and you have 200 candidates, why would you want to try and screen all 200 candidates when 100 of them can be eliminated based on giving them a basic math quiz? Hard to hire a person to teach math when they can't pass an 8th grade math quiz.

Then a lot of what women do actually DOES make sense. But not until you realize why it's happening and use logic based on being in that position.

The first goal then, as a man, is to not do things that disqualify yourself early on with women. However, once you reach that base level, instead of worrying about not disqualifying yourself, you then can start focusing on how to do things that make you stand out more than the majority of guys, so that your interactions not only don't disqualify you, they actually give you a significant boost.

But honestly, most guys would make their dating lives much easier if they would simply focus on not disqualifying themselves initially.

 

[BeExcellent]

I agree strongly with your comments above. I suppose for me too much interest (over-interest or simping if you will) or insufficient interest are both disqualifying in my history. So strive for the middle of the bell curve.

As a woman in the early stages you want a man who expresses interest without falling all over himself, but it requires some calibration to figure out the nuance in that.

I always politely and directly cut men loose who I didn’t like “like THAT”, but I also realize I am very unusual in that regard. Most women are conflict averse/afraid of hurting the guy/ghost/flake etc. because they don’t want to feel bad. They don’t consider the confusion this lack of direct communication creates in a guy when they are passive or indirect.

Me I’d rather pull the band aid off quick so everyone knows where things stand, get over it and drive on.

So I get where this comes from (men’s attitudes), I’m just not sure a binary view or an AWALT view is helpful (in fact I know it’s not) because whilst generalities exist for a reason, at the micro level relationships or interactions occur between individuals.

 

[BadBoy89]

The first goal then, as a man, is to not do things that disqualify yourself early on with women.

What things should a man not do to disqualify himself early on with a woman?

However, once you reach that base level, instead of worrying about not disqualifying yourself, you then can start focusing on how to do things that make you stand out more than the majority of guys, so that your interactions not only don't disqualify you, they actually give you a significant boost.

What things can a man do to make him stand out more from other guys?

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

I think what most guys fail to realize is that interactions with a stranger (women) can be random.

For example I recently matched with a woman who was attractive, had her shyte together, but was a SINK (single, no kids) never married. This tends to be a red flag for me as someone who looks for viability for the long term with every woman. To me it means something’s wrong here, it may not be apparent but something ain’t right.

We did a FaceTime for a good long time and she peltered me with questions, all which I answered, she basically left no room for me to ask her any. Then she had the audacity to say that all I did was talk about myself which was weird af given her battery of questions.

She then went onto to say that it was a problem, that she doesn’t have time for people that are all about themselves. What followed was me bringing her back into the fold and ending the conversation with her very interested in meeting and talking more.

Then being the SOB that I am, I ghosted her uppity arse.

Most women I meet compliment me on how open I am to talking about anything and how refreshing it is. The moral of the story is nothing ever is the same, you need to calibrate to who you’re talking to each and every time.

 

[soulforge]

I think what most guys fail to realize is that interactions with a stranger (women) can be random.

For example I recently matched with a woman who was attractive, had her shyte together, but was a SINK (single, no kids) never married. This tends to be a red flag for me as someone who looks for viability for the long term with every woman. To me it means something’s wrong here, it may not be apparent but something ain’t right.

We did a Factime for a good long time and she peltered me with questions, all which I answered, she basically left no room for me to ask her any. Then she had the audacity to say that all I did was talk about myself which was weird af given her battery of questions.

She then went onto to say that it was a problem, that she doesn’t have time for people that are all about themselves. What followed was me bringing her back into the fold and ending the conversation with her very interested in meeting and talking more.

Then being the SOB that I am, I ghosted her uppity arse.

Most women I meet compliment me on how open I am to talking about anything and how refreshing it is. The moral of the story is nothing ever is the same, you need to calibrate to who you’re talking to each and every time.

Well you got your question answered on, why she is single/ unmarried with no children.

 

[sosuave213]

I think what most guys fail to realize is that interactions with a stranger (women) can be random.

For example I recently matched with a woman who was attractive, had her shyte together, but was a SINK (single, no kids) never married. This tends to be a red flag for me as someone who looks for viability for the long term with every woman. To me it means something’s wrong here, it may not be apparent but something ain’t right.

We did a Factime for a good long time and she peltered me with questions, all which I answered, she basically left no room for me to ask her any. Then she had the audacity to say that all I did was talk about myself which was weird af given her battery of questions.

She then went onto to say that it was a problem, that she doesn’t have time for people that are all about themselves. What followed was me bringing her back into the fold and ending the conversation with her very interested in meeting and talking more.

Then being the SOB that I am, I ghosted her uppity arse.

Most women I meet compliment me on how open I am to talking about anything and how refreshing it is. The moral of the story is nothing ever is the same, you need to calibrate to who you’re talking to each and every time.

How old was she? Sink isn't necessarily a red flag. I would say kids and single are a red flag because she couldn't hold down a man, or divorced for the same reasons.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

I think what most guys fail to realize is that interactions with a stranger (women) can be random.

For example I recently matched with a woman who was attractive, had her shyte together, but was a SINK (single, no kids) never married. This tends to be a red flag for me as someone who looks for viability for the long term with every woman. To me it means something’s wrong here, it may not be apparent but something ain’t right.

We did a Factime for a good long time and she peltered me with questions, all which I answered, she basically left no room for me to ask her any. Then she had the audacity to say that all I did was talk about myself which was weird af given her battery of questions.

She then went onto to say that it was a problem, that she doesn’t have time for people that are all about themselves. What followed was me bringing her back into the fold and ending the conversation with her very interested in meeting and talking more.

Then being the SOB that I am, I ghosted her uppity arse.

Most women I meet compliment me on how open I am to talking about anything and how refreshing it is. The moral of the story is nothing ever is the same, you need to calibrate to who you’re talking to each and every time.

Finally someone that understands what I have been saying for so long here...

Guys think that finding age 35+ women with no kids is preferable to finding them with kids. Hell no it's not.

A woman that age with no kids is a walking giant red flag. The biggest one you could get.

She is likely some sort of psycho or has issues being with someone long term that will come to light after not so long.

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

How old was she? Sink isn't necessarily a red flag. I would say kids and single are a red flag because she couldn't hold down a man, or divorced for the same reasons.

Early 40’s.

 

[zekko]

This idea stems from men who have acted needy/desperate in the past who are trying to not come off that way to women which in most cases is even more off putting than not showing interest.

I remember back when I was a youngster trying to figure things out. We didn't have internet or red pill theory, so mostly it was by trial and error. I would blow one situation by being too eager, so I realized I had to dial it back. But I'd overshoot the mark, and the next time I would be too detached. Eventually, over time you would find the right balance.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

How old was she? Sink isn't necessarily a red flag. I would say kids and single are a red flag because she couldn't hold down a man, or divorced for the same reasons.

If she is older than 35 it's the single biggest red flag there is.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

I remember back when I was a youngster trying to figure things out. We didn't have internet or red pill theory, so mostly it was by trial and error. I would blow one situation by being too eager, so I realized I had to dial it back. But I'd overshoot the mark, and the next time I would be too detached. Eventually, over time you would find the right balance.

If you are one to learn from your mistakes you would. Many repeat the same mistakes over and over again and don't seem to learn from them.

 

[SW15]

SINK (single, no kids) never married. This tends to be a red flag for me as someone who looks for viability for the long term with every woman. To me it means something’s wrong here, it may not be apparent but something ain’t right.

Interesting. As a childless man, I prefer this style of woman as her lifestyle is likely more similar to mine than a childless woman.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Interesting. As a childless man, I prefer this style of woman as her lifestyle is likely more similar to mine than a childless woman.

It's not natural for a woman to not have kids. The strongest urge on earth for any animal species is for females to reproduce and bear young. That's where you don't seem to understand. It usually means there is something wrong with her mentally.

It might seem better at first but she is likely a psycho. And from most of the stories on here from guys who talk about psycho women, it's mostly ones without kids.

 

[sosuave213]

Finally someone that understands what I have been saying for so long here...

Guys think that finding age 35+ women with no kids is preferable to finding them with kids. Hell no it's not.

A woman that age with no kids is a walking giant red flag. The biggest one you could get.

She is likely some sort of psycho or has issues being with someone long term that will come to light after not so long.

I dated a 43 year old at 29. I can confirm. Sex was quality, though.

 

[SW15]

It's not natural for a woman to not have kids. The strongest urge on earth for any animal species is for females to reproduce and bear young. That's where you don't seem to understand. It usually means there is something wrong with her mentally.

It might seem better at first but she is likely a psycho. And from most of the stories on here from guys who talk about psycho women, it's mostly ones without kids.

Guys think that finding age 35+ women with no kids is preferable to finding them with kids. Hell no it's not.

A woman that age with no kids is a walking giant red flag. The biggest one you could get.

She is likely some sort of psycho or has issues being with someone long term that will come to light after not so long.

For childless men, raising another man's children is even less natural than a 30+ or 35+ childless woman.

As a 40 year old childless man, I'm going to have a huge lifestyle mismatch with a 34-40 year old single mother as compared to a 34-40 year old childless woman.

While older childless women aren't perfect, it's still a better option than raising another man's children from the perspective of a childless man.

In recent years, I've seen examples on social media of childless male college classmates cucking themselves to get into committed relationships with single mothers close to their own ages. Some of these men had their own kids with the single mom with pre-existing kids and some didn't.

I judge single dads less harshly for getting with single moms as compared to the childless men.

They have to feel like they're going to lose you.

This is dread game. Rollo Tomassi has talked about this.

Dread Games

I’m not exactly sure why, but somehow last week became the unofficial ‘dread’ week. I’ve had so many other irons in the fire both work-wise and blog-wise this month that I f…

therationalmale.com

Soft Dread

In the past I’ve covered in various detail the utility of instilling dread in a woman both pre and post monogamy. It’s been one of the more contentious principles I’ve endo…

therationalmale.com

 

[zekko]

If you are one to learn from your mistakes you would. Many repeat the same mistakes over and over again and don't seem to learn from them.

Clearly that seems to happen a lot when it comes to guys and sexual dynamics. I don't really understand how that can happen though.