krysrenee7
@krysrenee7
17 Years5,000+ Posts
Comments: 0 · Posts: 8735 · Topics: 522
The book, He's just not that into you
Posted by CappyyLuv30
I think the book is bullshit. I have no idea what value that book brings into this world. I even hate that line/phrase. So overused...
The UPS guy talks to me for 15 minutes each day.
"He's just not into you"
That guy looked at me and stuck his tongue out at me.
"He's just not into you"
That girl smiled at me.
"He's just not into you"
But it's a female.
"I don't care....He's just not into you"
Enough!
*rolls eyes*
😛 WOOT! ^5
his penis keeps falling out..."He's just not that in to you".
Posted by CappyyLuv30
LOL
I'll admit I didn't read the book. The movie was good though. 😛
From what I've heard from others that have read it, I just see this book as an excuse for ignorance. I mean MAYBE if you applied some common sense and used your best judgment when you gave out your phone number, you wouldn't have a need to read this book.
Plus, sometimes you gotta give people the benefit of the doubt too ya know? So if the guy doesn't call THE NEXT DAY, that's it! He's not that into you!. Really? Shit happens.
The best review on this book I've read is here.
I was gonna click the link but I'm just not that into it.
Posted by LibraSidPosted by CappyyLuv30
LOL
I'll admit I didn't read the book. The movie was good though. 😛
From what I've heard from others that have read it, I just see this book as an excuse for ignorance. I mean MAYBE if you applied some common sense and used your best judgment when you gave out your phone number, you wouldn't have a need to read this book.
Plus, sometimes you gotta give people the benefit of the doubt too ya know? So if the guy doesn't call THE NEXT DAY, that's it! He's not that into you!. Really? Shit happens.
The best review on this book I've read is here.
I was gonna click the link but I'm just not that into it.click to expand
LOL
Cappyy....
I agree, def overused.
I had a date once where the guy was very low key, a little quiet...going home in my car I thought "WOW he is def not into me"...I gave up on it right away.
Next day or two days later he called...and said after we talked a little he said "I think we have something here"
I was shocked because I thought he wasn't "into me" which was the feeling I had gotten.
You never know...I had another situation like that too, I thought this guy couldn't stand me, but it turned out he was into me,he just hid it...until he had the nerve to do something about it.
Honestly ladies sometimes they are not calling for all different reasons....
If they weren't into you why did they ask you out in the first place?? They had to be a little into you!!
Think about it, when you like a guy how long do you hide it or keep the secret, or play cool? Don't you think they do the
same?
One more quick thought....I had two grown men tell me recently that they both LOVE IT when a woman calls them!! And my son's gf approached him when they met, she pursued and they are still together..the book is just Greg's opinion...
I agree, def overused.
I had a date once where the guy was very low key, a little quiet...going home in my car I thought "WOW he is def not into me"...I gave up on it right away.
Next day or two days later he called...and said after we talked a little he said "I think we have something here"
I was shocked because I thought he wasn't "into me" which was the feeling I had gotten.
You never know...I had another situation like that too, I thought this guy couldn't stand me, but it turned out he was into me,he just hid it...until he had the nerve to do something about it.
Honestly ladies sometimes they are not calling for all different reasons....
If they weren't into you why did they ask you out in the first place?? They had to be a little into you!!
Think about it, when you like a guy how long do you hide it or keep the secret, or play cool? Don't you think they do the
same?
One more quick thought....I had two grown men tell me recently that they both LOVE IT when a woman calls them!! And my son's gf approached him when they met, she pursued and they are still together..the book is just Greg's opinion...
Posted by CappyyLuv30
LOL
I mean MAYBE if you applied some common sense and used your best judgment when you gave out your phone number, you wouldn't have a need to read this book.
">here.
I think that was the author's whole point, that common sense is NOT really all that common. To you, everything he said may be a "given" but he was shining a light on the fact that surprisingly, ALOT (if not most) women STILL don't get it.
And I must say, I agree with him. Alot of people don't have the common sense, & if they do, they don't have the strength to follow their own intuition.
Thing is, he stated in the book that you should take what he's saying with a grain of salt b/c he can't scientifically prove that every single man on earth is just "not that into you" even if he says/does (or lack thereof) certain things. He knows that there's always gonna be the exception. BUT, most of the scenarios in his book ARE happening & will continue to happen & as long as those situations with men keep happening, there will continue to be naive women & women who get heart broken.
And the author had a point. The women that responded & said "Nuh uh, my man IS into me" could never really answer his question when he asked them, "Well then why are you reading this book?" They all got silent! It's b/c even THEY knew deep down that things weren't all peachy! They were trying to justify that the men who've played them did so for any OTHER reason other than the fact that he just wasn't into them. And the author was trying to shove it down our throats that all the small details & "assumptions" of why/who/where/when he did didn't matter; the bigger picture of "He's just not that into you" is all that matters!
I agree with the author. If a man is REALLY so into you, he WILL call you, he WILL show up on time, he WILL be consistent, he WILL chase you, he WILL commit to you. No if's ands or buts. Regardless of why he may NOT do any of those things just mentioned doesn't really matter, considering the bigger picture is that he DIDN'T! And since he didn't, you as a woman walked away empty handed.
There are just some things that a man absolutely WON'T do if he's really into you (For instance, if he's truly into you, he will NOT hit you or put his hands on you)
I agree with him in that 2% of the male population may be the "exception" But let's be real! There's another 98% of guys who are NOT the exception & that when they do/don't do certain things it's b/c it absolutely means certain things (he's not that into you). If we're gonna pay attention to anything, it oughta be the 98% (majority) vs. conveinantly only noticing the 2% of guys who actually didn't call for a good reason or who were actually "too busy."
His point was that women are ok with having 50% of a man's admiration when they could REALLY be getting 100% if they'd just leave the guys who aren't into them & move on to the ones that are. Some guys may be into you a little bit, BUT the question is, are they into you ENOUGH?! If you're gonna have the pie, have the whole pie, not just 25% . If you're gonna be committed, be committed fulltime, not part of the time. If you're into me, your actions should be reflect that most (if not all) of the time, not only sometimes
There are just some things that a man absolutely WON'T do if he's really into you (For instance, if he's truly into you, he will NOT hit you or put his hands on you)
I agree with him in that 2% of the male population may be the "exception" But let's be real! There's another 98% of guys who are NOT the exception & that when they do/don't do certain things it's b/c it absolutely means certain things (he's not that into you). If we're gonna pay attention to anything, it oughta be the 98% (majority) vs. conveinantly only noticing the 2% of guys who actually didn't call for a good reason or who were actually "too busy."
His point was that women are ok with having 50% of a man's admiration when they could REALLY be getting 100% if they'd just leave the guys who aren't into them & move on to the ones that are. Some guys may be into you a little bit, BUT the question is, are they into you ENOUGH?! If you're gonna have the pie, have the whole pie, not just 25% . If you're gonna be committed, be committed fulltime, not part of the time. If you're into me, your actions should be reflect that most (if not all) of the time, not only sometimes
Posted by CappyyLuv30Posted by sunshine222
One more quick thought....I had two grown men tell me recently that they both LOVE IT when a woman calls them!!
I agree. Men shouldn't do ALL the work. I believe in reciprocation too. I'm all for men taking the initiative (sexyyyy!) but I also show that I'm interested too.
click to expand
He never said that men should do all the work. He said that the the work they actually DO put in can atleast be done thoroughly. In other words, if a man is gonna work to earn a woman's affection, he oughta do it whole-heartedly & not half way. Expecting a man to deliver & be consistent doesn't mean the same thing as him doing all the work.
The only time he encourages women NOT to do any work at all is when the man is NOT doing any work at all. And I have to agree with him on that.
Posted by size zero superhero
Never read the book nor seen the movie. Going by what I hear about it, there should definitely be a publication titled She's Just Not That Into You dedicated to all sufferers of 'Nice Guy Syndrome'.
And no, not in reference to genuinely nice men. Nice Guy Syndrome is quite different.
Funny thing is, men aren't the only 1's who do or don't do certain things to show that they're not into you. Alot of women that read the book said that they can TOO admit that they normally did/didn't do some of the same things the author mentioned, when they weren't really all into a man like that. And since alot of women could identify & relate to alot of his examples, it made reality that much more real. In other words if YOU not calling a man for 2 weeks means you're not that into him, what'd make you think that the same wouldn't ring true persay a man didn't call you for an entire 2 weeks?!
I hope they do come out with "She's just not that into you." The only difference is, guys move on alot faster than some women do. Women try to stay & make all the excuses in the world. They may even try to change the man or "wait." But men keep it moving & go right onto the next. Ugh, sometimes I wish I was a man!
The problem with some relationship books is that they try to encourage one gender completely transforming themselves so that they can be wired like & think like the opposite sex.
Women are being told that they have to think like a man and/or conform to a man's way(s) of thinking in order for her to have long-lasting & fulfilling relationships. The same goes vice versa. Men are being told that if they could just place themselves in a woman's shoes and/or wire themselves to think like we do, that maybe their relationships with us would last longer & be more fulfilling. And I don't agree with that.
You can't hard-wire a woman to think like a man. And here's why...it's b/c she's NOT a man. And vice versa.
Just b/c 2 species are different does NOT mean that they can't co-exist & find a happy medium.
Both women & men can def. overall step their game up & take a few pointers on how to seek, find AND keep the opposite sex, but I don't agree that the key to doing that is in completely transforming yourself as if you were the other gender.
Men shouldn't be doing ALL the work, BUT the work they actually ARE putting in (even if just 50% ) should be done whole-heartedly & not half-ass. Same goes for women. The problem is that women/men try to justify why they stay in half-ass relationships/friendships only to complain when things don't last.
Truth is: Men are gonna be men & women are gonna be women, BUT just b/c the 2 are different & wired differently (literally, men & women even have different organs) doesn't mean that 1 has to turn into/think like the other just to get a relationship off the ground.
I think it's actually quite simple. If you're into someone, you should be doing EVERYTHING you can to show that, not only verbally but through your actions. Love/admiration is a verb, not a noun. And if someone is NOT giving you what you deserve, leave & move on. But to stay & think that somehow changing your mental make-up is going to someone make someone even more interested in you is just silly.
I'm a firm believer that there truly IS someone out there whose a good fit for ALL of us. Not every frog will turn into a prince. Yes, every woman is beautiful within her own right, BUT hey not even every woman will be a "great catch."
Women are being told that they have to think like a man and/or conform to a man's way(s) of thinking in order for her to have long-lasting & fulfilling relationships. The same goes vice versa. Men are being told that if they could just place themselves in a woman's shoes and/or wire themselves to think like we do, that maybe their relationships with us would last longer & be more fulfilling. And I don't agree with that.
You can't hard-wire a woman to think like a man. And here's why...it's b/c she's NOT a man. And vice versa.
Just b/c 2 species are different does NOT mean that they can't co-exist & find a happy medium.
Both women & men can def. overall step their game up & take a few pointers on how to seek, find AND keep the opposite sex, but I don't agree that the key to doing that is in completely transforming yourself as if you were the other gender.
Men shouldn't be doing ALL the work, BUT the work they actually ARE putting in (even if just 50% ) should be done whole-heartedly & not half-ass. Same goes for women. The problem is that women/men try to justify why they stay in half-ass relationships/friendships only to complain when things don't last.
Truth is: Men are gonna be men & women are gonna be women, BUT just b/c the 2 are different & wired differently (literally, men & women even have different organs) doesn't mean that 1 has to turn into/think like the other just to get a relationship off the ground.
I think it's actually quite simple. If you're into someone, you should be doing EVERYTHING you can to show that, not only verbally but through your actions. Love/admiration is a verb, not a noun. And if someone is NOT giving you what you deserve, leave & move on. But to stay & think that somehow changing your mental make-up is going to someone make someone even more interested in you is just silly.
I'm a firm believer that there truly IS someone out there whose a good fit for ALL of us. Not every frog will turn into a prince. Yes, every woman is beautiful within her own right, BUT hey not even every woman will be a "great catch."
Posted by QuietSt0rm
I agree with you krys, mostly, because I do think women try to mold themselves into what they THINK a man wants, but some people read these books simply to see things from the other side. To get a better understanding of the opposite sex, but not necessarily to change themselves at all. I think it really depends on the person. People read for different reasons, but I do agree with you that people are foolish to think that they can .
>
Good point. It's not so much that I fear the people who read this books will try to change who they are for love, but moreso that I'm a little concerned at the fact that the actual authors of these books are encouraging both women/men to do so in order to find, seek & maintain love.
And omg, I heard about that book!! Have you read it? What are the people giving the reviews saying?
Posted by QuietSt0rm
I haven't read relationships based books in at least 2 years, lately I'm on my spiritual/inspirational kick.
I know that's right! There's so many authors/experts pulling us 1 way, while there's another 10,000 pulling us another way.
I say bump the "rules" & just find yourself! Once you find yourself & become the woman you want to be to impress YOURSELF, that finding, impressing & keeping someone else won't seem like such a challenge.
Ugh! Enough with all the dating "rules." Since there's always gonna be "the exception" it leaves too much room & too many loop holes for women/men to avoid common sense & jump through those hoops. People naturally look for ways to justify the decisions they make with the opposite sex, even if their "Dating resume" is filled with relationships that didn't last or mainly ended in heartbreak!
@Ameth: BINGO! DING DING DING! I 100% completely agree with you!
Women are always trying to get men to better understand us, almost so much so that we feel they'd maybe get a clue if they could step outside of their own testicles for a second & think like us.
Welp, men are the same way. They want understanding too. They get it, women & men are different, but if men must be made to undestand how we women tick in order to get what they want out of us, then why the weird faces when men expect for women to do the same things?
Not to say that men are like kids (cough) but seriously they kind of are! When a woman has a child, she can't get upset that she has to talk in "baby code," or when she can't figure out why the baby keeps on crying. She has to suck it up, read a few books, ask a few questions & try to figure out what's going on! She has to remember that a 2 year old doesn't function in the same way a 20+ year old would! And if she can't handle that, she doesn't need to be having children; and if a woman can't handle learning how to see thing's from a MAN'S perspective, then she shouldn't be the main & first 1 claiming she's looking for "real love."
Steve Harvey wasn't LITERALLY saying that a woman oughta think like a man. Surely, most guys are JUST FINE with feminism & how we tick. BUT it's not always about how women are, how we tick & what we deserve & then game over! No, the relationship books shouldn't stop there. The rest of those books should be about women learning how to step outside of their biological clocks & recognize that if you want a good man, you better get hip. B/c if not, you'll continue be yet another "one of those women" who keeps getting hurt/confused & done wrong when all of that was preventable!
You can't knock/judge what you don't understand!
Women are always trying to get men to better understand us, almost so much so that we feel they'd maybe get a clue if they could step outside of their own testicles for a second & think like us.
Welp, men are the same way. They want understanding too. They get it, women & men are different, but if men must be made to undestand how we women tick in order to get what they want out of us, then why the weird faces when men expect for women to do the same things?
Not to say that men are like kids (cough) but seriously they kind of are! When a woman has a child, she can't get upset that she has to talk in "baby code," or when she can't figure out why the baby keeps on crying. She has to suck it up, read a few books, ask a few questions & try to figure out what's going on! She has to remember that a 2 year old doesn't function in the same way a 20+ year old would! And if she can't handle that, she doesn't need to be having children; and if a woman can't handle learning how to see thing's from a MAN'S perspective, then she shouldn't be the main & first 1 claiming she's looking for "real love."
Steve Harvey wasn't LITERALLY saying that a woman oughta think like a man. Surely, most guys are JUST FINE with feminism & how we tick. BUT it's not always about how women are, how we tick & what we deserve & then game over! No, the relationship books shouldn't stop there. The rest of those books should be about women learning how to step outside of their biological clocks & recognize that if you want a good man, you better get hip. B/c if not, you'll continue be yet another "one of those women" who keeps getting hurt/confused & done wrong when all of that was preventable!
You can't knock/judge what you don't understand!
@Cappy: Crazy thing is, Steve Harvey's book in some ways totally CONTRADICTS what was said in "He's just NOT that into you." Crazy thing is, I think both authors are right about the very same things, even though their perspectives are different.
In Steve Harvey's book he advises women to have that "talk" about where things are going with a man b/c all women have the right to know & that if we don't ask, we'll never know. But Greg's book states the exact opposite. He advises women that if a man is really all that into you, HE will be the 1 to take the lead & commit to you so fast that you won't even have time to have that "talk" with him b/c the man sweeping you off your feet will allow his actions to speak for him! And in this case, I actually agree with BOTH authors, even though their messages/advice to women are the exact opposite.
Steve says that if a man is really into you, he'll wait & not even think about trying to get in your pants b/c he'll be so busy & pre-occupied falling in love with your personality & basically everything ELSE you're showing to him; Steve claims that the longer a guy keeps his paws off of you, the more likely he's really INto you. But yet Greg says something completely different! Greg thinks that if a man hasn't atleast hinted to a woman his sexual hunger for her, that it's probably b/c he's NOT that into her; he claims that a man's sexual hunger for a woman is the FIRST indicator that a man is into you (HOW (if at all) he actually reacts to that sexual hunger for you is a different story!)
Once again, I agree with both authors even though their advice is completely the opposite! Is that even possible? =P
In Steve Harvey's book he advises women to have that "talk" about where things are going with a man b/c all women have the right to know & that if we don't ask, we'll never know. But Greg's book states the exact opposite. He advises women that if a man is really all that into you, HE will be the 1 to take the lead & commit to you so fast that you won't even have time to have that "talk" with him b/c the man sweeping you off your feet will allow his actions to speak for him! And in this case, I actually agree with BOTH authors, even though their messages/advice to women are the exact opposite.
Steve says that if a man is really into you, he'll wait & not even think about trying to get in your pants b/c he'll be so busy & pre-occupied falling in love with your personality & basically everything ELSE you're showing to him; Steve claims that the longer a guy keeps his paws off of you, the more likely he's really INto you. But yet Greg says something completely different! Greg thinks that if a man hasn't atleast hinted to a woman his sexual hunger for her, that it's probably b/c he's NOT that into her; he claims that a man's sexual hunger for a woman is the FIRST indicator that a man is into you (HOW (if at all) he actually reacts to that sexual hunger for you is a different story!)
Once again, I agree with both authors even though their advice is completely the opposite! Is that even possible? =P
Posted by BelovedAssata
Did the guy ever explain a way to work around a guy that is willing to sleep with you but "isn't in to you." because that's the basis of most confusion,heartache and whatnot...if he doesn't address any of that..than I'm good. I'd rather read Steve Harvey or "men are from mars...blah blah venus.
Steve didn't but Greg did. Greg's whole point of the book was to showcase the signs of a guy whose just not that into you, in hopes that the women reading would look at their own situations, that a bright light bulb would go off in their heads & that they'd finally move on from the situation BEFORE things even get to the confusion/heart-break stage. Sadly most women don't, but not b/c they aren't capable. The signs are usually there-women just have to interpret them the right way.
Greg said it best, women play it off like they're so "confused." Men aren't confused 1 bit; it is what it is. Certain things are black/white. For instance, if the guy only calls you after 10PM (and yet he got off work at 5pm), his intentions of only wanting a "booty call" are obvious & right there in your face, hence he's just NOT that into you! There's no getting around that! But women like to argue with common sense, and even worse with their own intuitions
Posted by iceprincess
just a bunch of stating the obvious
Oh trust me! By some of the responses alot of the women reveiwing the book gave, common sense/"the obvious" is clearly NOT so obvious after all! Alot of the women that gave reveiws said things like, "Omg! This book was a life-saver!" or "I def. learned alot! It all makes sense now!" And I was left thinking, wow, really, you honestly didn't know? Smh smh
Plus, women who hate the FWB situations they're in now oughta read BOTH books. And ALOTTTTT of women in this country are in situations, sitting somewhere & just "waiting" or just "hoping" that things will turn into more. So I can't really blaim the author for writing the book b/c if women actually "got it" like they swear they do, half the women in this country wouldn't be so heartbroken or still entertaining the bastards that SHOWED them (notice I didn't say 'told them') plenty of times that he just wasn't that into her.
Even when you get on dating sites or hear about women who are looking for love, they always come with some sort of story about how the last A-hole did them wrong, lead them on or flipped a 180 on them. Sad thing is, had they read the book OR known which red flags to look for on their own, they wouldn't still be on the market. Instead, they'd be entertaining the REAL prince charming that had been rightfully earning them all along. But of course, it's very hard to notice the sincere guys when you're too busy stuck up the asses of the guys who don't & never did want you. So sad =P
Even when you get on dating sites or hear about women who are looking for love, they always come with some sort of story about how the last A-hole did them wrong, lead them on or flipped a 180 on them. Sad thing is, had they read the book OR known which red flags to look for on their own, they wouldn't still be on the market. Instead, they'd be entertaining the REAL prince charming that had been rightfully earning them all along. But of course, it's very hard to notice the sincere guys when you're too busy stuck up the asses of the guys who don't & never did want you. So sad =P
Just wanted to put in that a book that actually helped me was Mars and Venus on a Date. I don't remember the particulars of the book now, and I know that its companion book, Men are from Mars Women are from Venus gets criticized a lot, but I put some of its techniques to work with the next guy I was into after reading the book and darned if I'm not married to him now. I have a history of being dumb in relationships, and it just helped me keep my head on straight while I was dating.
People are always going to argue with whatever "statistics" or "facts/data" they come across. Even if a study came out this year that showed that 99% of men who didn't call, say they didn't b/c they weren't that into you, I'm willing to bet you that more women than men would argue this. Which is weird to me considering once AGAIN, women refuse to listen, even if the truth is coming from the horse's mouth himself!
"Men are from Mars, women are from Venus" was a pretty eye-opening book. I loved it. Of course people argued that it's contents weren't "up to date" or in touch with how things are now, but I disagree. Women always like to separate themselves & consider themselves to be "different" but yet when men do the same (especially if their difference clashes with how women are in certain areas) women want to challenge those theories & argue even though men themselves are telling us bluntly & clearly how it is.
We women can be such selfish creatures. We want our worlds to revolve around us & we want all the understanding in the world, but yet the min. a man asks for the same, we dig our claws into him & make it seem like he's got "some nerve." Smh smh and yet women keep reading those relationship books that are meant to challenge the close-minded, & answer the questions that other women just can't answer. And when they decide to reject everything coming from a "male's perspective," they then get mad that they can't ever find or keep a man, thus to once again go back to reading the very books whose advice/wisdom they'll probably reject all over again. It's a re-occuring cycle smh
We women can be such selfish creatures. We want our worlds to revolve around us & we want all the understanding in the world, but yet the min. a man asks for the same, we dig our claws into him & make it seem like he's got "some nerve." Smh smh and yet women keep reading those relationship books that are meant to challenge the close-minded, & answer the questions that other women just can't answer. And when they decide to reject everything coming from a "male's perspective," they then get mad that they can't ever find or keep a man, thus to once again go back to reading the very books whose advice/wisdom they'll probably reject all over again. It's a re-occuring cycle smh
Join the Conversation. Explore Yourself. Connect with Others.
Discover insights, swap stories, and find people. dxpnet is where experiences turn into understanding.
Create Your Free Account →Related Topics
Despite how you feel about someone emotionally, physically, sexually ,etc. what types of things would you say you absolu
Ok,here it is PP and 11TH,and any other gays that may be here. I know an old gay dude.well,really he's just an acquai
Ive been called a Party Starter. I like to initiate sex with a guy but i really get turned on when guys take the lead an
I am a pretty shy guy and I have been dating this girl for a while but have never explicitly expressed by feelings for h
How many of you would probably feel guilty if you felt the urge to get another companion after your partner/spouse died?
1. Conveinantly forget to mention that they have children. No, you don't have to introduce me to your children just yet
What do you think contributes to having a high or low sex drive? And just to make it a little fun, what do you think
A huge part of me was holding it at bay. Its every girls dream day...but for me,I had to be sure,after countless posts.
Here's a little story to illustrate my question... One sunny day a beautiful young woman was driving along in her car
Something inside of me breaks! Any time I see a man cry (especially if he's sobbing/balling his eyes out), I always g
Ugh, don't you just hate them!!? It's ok for a man to sleep with 100 girls. The more women he sleeps with, the more o
What's your definition of a freak? There are people who are sexually experienced b/c well, they've had sex alot &
Just watching the old movie... so I ask: Fellas would you let another man fuck your wife for a Million? I mean are
Dream about your wedding day? Do you have it planned out? Do you dream about your knigh in shinning armor? Do y
Ok, over the past few days this has become intergrated into a thread I was reading and is now part of another thread tha
They say love knows no fear. But I beg to differ. Yes, too much fear can ruin things, BUT having SOME (keyword) fear
Is there really even a difference? Me & my girlfriends were talking about this recently & I was surprised that alot
This is some advice an older female relative of mine gave me regarding women. This was years back when I went through e
They did a recent study (October 2010) at Harvard University on 26,000 men/women in the US (of all races). They found ou
Men are any of you like this and if so why?? he calls texts everyday says he loves me opens up and tells me his probl
All I'll say is wow. If there's 1 thing I agree with it's that women def. need to start BREAKING the habbit of continually making excuses for men.
Yeah yeah yeah there's always exceptions to every rule, BUT for the most part, if the women reading the books were so "right" they wouldn't have needed to read the book in the 1st place.
Yeah yeah yeah you can't always assume the worsts & sometimes things may look bad, suspicious or fishy even if a man's intentiens are squeaky clean & innocent. HOWEVER, dammit some things just mean certain things & there's usually NO getting around that!
-If he's NOT calling you...Come on, that's a given. NO he's not THAT busy. And if he is, are you sure you'd even want a guy who is insulted/offended at the fact that yes, you want him to lift 2 fingers & dial your number?
-If he's telling you he's not ready for a relationship, he def. means it. BUT more than likely he REALLY means that he's not ready for a relationship with YOU & there IS a difference.
-If he hasn't tried to sleep with you after knowing you for 6 months, don't be so excited. When a man is sexually attracted to a woman, he won't be able to stop himself. Sure, he can keep his hands to himself if he figures making a move will offend you BUT for the most part, if he doesn't desire you atleast sexually, he probably doesn't desire you in any other way either, hence he's just NOT that into you.
I personally think the book was brilliant! It teaches woman that it's mighty arrogant of them to be offended when every guy on earth isn't into them. Clearly every woman isn't into every single guy that's into her, but yet we don't walk around feeling guilty or bad b/c a guy just wasn't that UMPH! we were looking for. So it's important to know that guys don't feel sorry for it either. What, would we have rather them stick around even though they weren't that into us? Surely, there'd be no gain in that, not now or ever in the future either
What'd you guys think of the book OR atleast of the concept that if a man is into he, he'll do WHATEVER (literally) he has to do to find you, chase you, AND keep you? I think this philosophy is true, AND even applies to shy and/or insecure guys too =)