S/O Do women play "hard to get" anymore?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Initiating is totally okay, as long as you don't take it too far too fast, and you don't persist when you've been rebuffed. If you ask for a woman's number and she declines, you walk away instead of pushing her to give it to you. Go ahead and ask her out, but if she says no or makes up some excuse without offering an alternative date, don't ask again. If a date is going well, you'd like to kiss her and she doesn't seem like she's keeping you at arm's length, go ahead and kiss her, but don't stick your tongue down her throat and/or grab her breast/ass.

As for incidents like the Aziz Ansari thing, there was a lot going on there, but a good starting point is that just because you saw a woman enjoy something in porn doesn't mean a real life woman is actually going to think it feels good. Keep things a little more straight forward and err on the side of taking things slow until you have a better sense of her sexual comfort and preferences. When in doubt, ask if she wants to do X, if she likes how something feels, or what she would like you to do to her.

99% of it (in the bedroom and outside) is paying attention to her and how she's responding rather than thinking ahead to the next thing you want to say/do to her.

I would say as for the Aziz, sucking his dick was a pretty good response. She is a nut from the sounds of it. She said her response was to pull away from fingers in her mouth? Shouldn't an adult be able to say what they want to someone they were comfortable enough with to let them stick their dick in her mouth? She said nothing, did nothing and didnt leave. No story there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, women can speak up for themselves. But if you're dating someone you like and want to keep seeing, do you really want to get to the point where you make her so uncomfortable she needs to tell you to stop, which can be such a turn-off that you probably won't get another date with her? Isn't it better for everyone if you pay attention to how she's responding to you so you can stop before you reach that point? I mean, that's what you should be doing anyway when you're dating someone, paying attention to them and engaging with them in the moment, just because you've moved on from dinner to sex doesn't change that.

News flash--women are a dime a dozen to superstars like Ansari. If she says no, there's 100 waiting in the wings to say how high when he says jump.

He did nothing wrong, she got burned. Lesson learned for our little starf4cker.

That may be the case for Aziz Ansari but I'm not talking to him, I'm talking to OP, who probably isn't a celebrity and who is trying to figure out how to navigate the dating scene after being out of it for 20 years.

OP here - My original post probably wasn't the clearest, but I'm not getting back into the dating scene. I was more trying to figure out how to view the current news about gender relations. Back in my day, there was a certain level of expectation that a woman should make a guy chase her a little bit. Viewed through that lens, you give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing when a woman is playing hard to get. If that sort of thing isn't common anymore, then it makes it a lot clearer that a guy should just stop when his initiation isn't pretty immediately met with enthusiastic reciprocation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, women can speak up for themselves. But if you're dating someone you like and want to keep seeing, do you really want to get to the point where you make her so uncomfortable she needs to tell you to stop, which can be such a turn-off that you probably won't get another date with her? Isn't it better for everyone if you pay attention to how she's responding to you so you can stop before you reach that point? I mean, that's what you should be doing anyway when you're dating someone, paying attention to them and engaging with them in the moment, just because you've moved on from dinner to sex doesn't change that.

News flash--women are a dime a dozen to superstars like Ansari. If she says no, there's 100 waiting in the wings to say how high when he says jump.

He did nothing wrong, she got burned. Lesson learned for our little starf4cker.

That may be the case for Aziz Ansari but I'm not talking to him, I'm talking to OP, who probably isn't a celebrity and who is trying to figure out how to navigate the dating scene after being out of it for 20 years.

Would it not be better to tell her to speak up rather than talk about men reading body language? Not knocking your post at all, it is how it should be in an ideal world. Ironically passivity is one the number one attraction killers in women , while assertive/aggression and dominance have the highest arousal response compared to "nice" attributes. You post of paying attention is very important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here - My original post probably wasn't the clearest, but I'm not getting back into the dating scene. I was more trying to figure out how to view the current news about gender relations. Back in my day, there was a certain level of expectation that a woman should make a guy chase her a little bit. Viewed through that lens, you give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing when a woman is playing hard to get. If that sort of thing isn't common anymore, then it makes it a lot clearer that a guy should just stop when his initiation isn't pretty immediately met with enthusiastic reciprocation.

You are in your late 40s? I'm just a couple of years younger, and I call bullshit. There were plenty of women in the 80s and 90s who were enthusiastically pursuing men. And you don't "give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing". What do you mean by this, exactly? No has always meant no, and women have been pretty overt with that message since the second wave; you could hardly not have known.

If you were in your 60s or 70s, maybe I'd buy this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - My original post probably wasn't the clearest, but I'm not getting back into the dating scene. I was more trying to figure out how to view the current news about gender relations. Back in my day, there was a certain level of expectation that a woman should make a guy chase her a little bit. Viewed through that lens, you give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing when a woman is playing hard to get. If that sort of thing isn't common anymore, then it makes it a lot clearer that a guy should just stop when his initiation isn't pretty immediately met with enthusiastic reciprocation.

You are in your late 40s? I'm just a couple of years younger, and I call bullshit. There were plenty of women in the 80s and 90s who were enthusiastically pursuing men. And you don't "give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing". What do you mean by this, exactly? No has always meant no, and women have been pretty overt with that message since the second wave; you could hardly not have known.

If you were in your 60s or 70s, maybe I'd buy this.

Fellow 40-something here. I think there is some difference though. I really don't think we were as casual about sex as young women are today, as evidenced by this Aziz story, the Cat Person tale, and even this week's Modern Love column. We had our share of one-night stands to be sure, but we didn't expect them to turn into relationships, and I don't think we considered them to be standard everyday dating like today's women do. They seem to be having a lot of sex outside of relationships, and are then surprised when they're not treated respectfully. There's a disconnect there as I and others see it.

[Anonymous]

It's obviously individual, but speaking for myself, I have never played hard to get or enjoyed being pursued. It's too passive and I prefer being proactive. So when I indicated lack of interest, even if done very kindly (which was normally the case), I 100% meant it. For some reason some men mistake politeness or basis niceness for romantic interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - My original post probably wasn't the clearest, but I'm not getting back into the dating scene. I was more trying to figure out how to view the current news about gender relations. Back in my day, there was a certain level of expectation that a woman should make a guy chase her a little bit. Viewed through that lens, you give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing when a woman is playing hard to get. If that sort of thing isn't common anymore, then it makes it a lot clearer that a guy should just stop when his initiation isn't pretty immediately met with enthusiastic reciprocation.

You are in your late 40s? I'm just a couple of years younger, and I call bullshit. There were plenty of women in the 80s and 90s who were enthusiastically pursuing men. And you don't "give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing". What do you mean by this, exactly? No has always meant no, and women have been pretty overt with that message since the second wave; you could hardly not have known.

If you were in your 60s or 70s, maybe I'd buy this.

Don't know what to tell you -- I'm from the Midwest and everything happens about 20 years later there. I'm not talking about blowing past a humorless "no." But if it was more of a pretend (at least you hoped it was pretend) exasperated "no" with a smile on a second or third date you might keep kissing on her to see if she warmed up.

[Anonymous]

Playing "hard to get" is going to be challenging in an age of dating apps and paranoid men following the "Mike Pence Rule."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Playing "hard to get" is going to be challenging in an age of dating apps and paranoid men following the "Mike Pence Rule."

Are men behaving like Mike Pence, or are men in the dating arena doing things exactly the same way as 2 or 3 years ago? Harvey Weinstein and Matt Lauer are out of jobs. That affects people no where near most of us. Stop pretending what happens to celebrities is significant to, say, Walmart workers or Beltway bandits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - My original post probably wasn't the clearest, but I'm not getting back into the dating scene. I was more trying to figure out how to view the current news about gender relations. Back in my day, there was a certain level of expectation that a woman should make a guy chase her a little bit. Viewed through that lens, you give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing when a woman is playing hard to get. If that sort of thing isn't common anymore, then it makes it a lot clearer that a guy should just stop when his initiation isn't pretty immediately met with enthusiastic reciprocation.

You are in your late 40s? I'm just a couple of years younger, and I call bullshit. There were plenty of women in the 80s and 90s who were enthusiastically pursuing men. And you don't "give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing". What do you mean by this, exactly? No has always meant no, and women have been pretty overt with that message since the second wave; you could hardly not have known.

If you were in your 60s or 70s, maybe I'd buy this.

Bingo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Playing "hard to get" is going to be challenging in an age of dating apps and paranoid men following the "Mike Pence Rule."

Are men behaving like Mike Pence, or are men in the dating arena doing things exactly the same way as 2 or 3 years ago? Harvey Weinstein and Matt Lauer are out of jobs. That affects people no where near most of us. Stop pretending what happens to celebrities is significant to, say, Walmart workers or Beltway bandits.

Uh... sure. The plebs are taking no notice and are just living as we did before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - My original post probably wasn't the clearest, but I'm not getting back into the dating scene. I was more trying to figure out how to view the current news about gender relations. Back in my day, there was a certain level of expectation that a woman should make a guy chase her a little bit. Viewed through that lens, you give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing when a woman is playing hard to get. If that sort of thing isn't common anymore, then it makes it a lot clearer that a guy should just stop when his initiation isn't pretty immediately met with enthusiastic reciprocation.

You are in your late 40s? I'm just a couple of years younger, and I call bullshit. There were plenty of women in the 80s and 90s who were enthusiastically pursuing men. And you don't "give a guy a certain leeway to keep pursuing". What do you mean by this, exactly? No has always meant no, and women have been pretty overt with that message since the second wave; you could hardly not have known.

If you were in your 60s or 70s, maybe I'd buy this.

Fellow 40-something here. I think there is some difference though. I really don't think we were as casual about sex as young women are today, as evidenced by this Aziz story, the Cat Person tale, and even this week's Modern Love column. We had our share of one-night stands to be sure, but we didn't expect them to turn into relationships, and I don't think we considered them to be standard everyday dating like today's women do. They seem to be having a lot of sex outside of relationships, and are then surprised when they're not treated respectfully. There's a disconnect there as I and others see it.

The strange thing is you have to go back to the 50's to find twenty-somethings have less sex than the current group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, women can speak up for themselves. But if you're dating someone you like and want to keep seeing, do you really want to get to the point where you make her so uncomfortable she needs to tell you to stop, which can be such a turn-off that you probably won't get another date with her? Isn't it better for everyone if you pay attention to how she's responding to you so you can stop before you reach that point? I mean, that's what you should be doing anyway when you're dating someone, paying attention to them and engaging with them in the moment, just because you've moved on from dinner to sex doesn't change that.

News flash--women are a dime a dozen to superstars like Ansari. If she says no, there's 100 waiting in the wings to say how high when he says jump.

He did nothing wrong, she got burned. Lesson learned for our little starf4cker.

That may be the case for Aziz Ansari but I'm not talking to him, I'm talking to OP, who probably isn't a celebrity and who is trying to figure out how to navigate the dating scene after being out of it for 20 years.

Would it not be better to tell her to speak up rather than talk about men reading body language? Not knocking your post at all, it is how it should be in an ideal world. Ironically passivity is one the number one attraction killers in women , while assertive/aggression and dominance have the highest arousal response compared to "nice" attributes. You post of paying attention is very important.

We can do both, talk to women about speaking up earlier/more often and talk to men about reading body language and paying attention to social cues? But the other part of this that needs to be addressed is that wen a woman speaks up, the reaction can't be to tell her to just relax and she'll enjoy it, or call her a bitch or a whore or a cock tease. It can't be to spread rumors about her in retaliation. These are all things that many women have experienced after telling a guy to back off, and it's a big part of why women are reluctant to speak up, they don't want the retaliation and are hoping that if they just keep moving away when the guy starts trying to put a hand up their shirt, he'll get the hint that this means their hand isn't welcome there.

[Anonymous]

I feel bad for kids these days. No seduction. No human connection. Of course she felt used, she was used. She allowed herself to be used. Of course he is going to want to have sex with a willing woman. He's a man. Look at the rates gay men have sex to see what happens when women are taken out of the equation.

No wonder the kids are all on anti-depressants. Sex is meant to be vulnerable, seductive, transgressive and hot. #millenialsaredoingitwrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, women can speak up for themselves. But if you're dating someone you like and want to keep seeing, do you really want to get to the point where you make her so uncomfortable she needs to tell you to stop, which can be such a turn-off that you probably won't get another date with her? Isn't it better for everyone if you pay attention to how she's responding to you so you can stop before you reach that point? I mean, that's what you should be doing anyway when you're dating someone, paying attention to them and engaging with them in the moment, just because you've moved on from dinner to sex doesn't change that.

News flash--women are a dime a dozen to superstars like Ansari. If she says no, there's 100 waiting in the wings to say how high when he says jump.

He did nothing wrong, she got burned. Lesson learned for our little starf4cker.

Maybe before this article, but now everyone knows he is absolutely awful in bed. There’s no way I’d get within arm’s reach of a guy after hearing about moves like those.