Hello handsome men of DXP. Question.

So, ive been reading up on dating psychology. I have read exclusively (like literally every source) say that a man will not get into a relationship with a woman he doesnt feel he had to invest in. Not monetarily but that he had to put in sufficient effort. That things were not super easy. In the sense of establishing the dates, he is more apt to want a women who actually declines the first date, but suggests a second date to counteract. That a woman has to set the pace or a man "burns himself out". Example... if a woman and man have sex and its great, and he says lets see each other tomorrow... she declines but offers a date down the line. Not rejecting him at all, but creating space.

Now I know that "hard to get" is a common game... but this is different. It's stating that men get very heated up when interacting with women, so that a woman slowing his pace down, makes for relationship longevity. That it is crucial for a woman to allow for a slow simmer for the first year. If she wants to last past the year mark. Basically men get overly hyped but rarely can maintain that level.

Men are the pursuers, women the pacers.

Thoughts?

Haha. That’s not nice!!!

That don't just apply to handsome men, but ugly ones too lol

Oooops sorry this is the *handsome man cave*



☺️🌝😬

Posted by Smidge
Handsome? WHERE

OMG!!! You are too cute! Love the new pics!

I was just using it as a term of endearment. Looks having nothing to do with post. Hahahahaha

Posted by heliumfiasco
I was just using it as a term of endearment. Looks having nothing to do with post. Hahahahaha

Oh, I thought you were taking the piss

😛

Posted by Pleistoanax
I could enlighten you on this but since I'm not qualified my hands are shackled by your rules.

You don't need to be qualified to pass an opinion

I was really stating you were all handsome and inviting you all in.

Posted by heliumfiasco
I was really stating you were all handsome and inviting you all in.

You'll never get to heaven telling porkies like that

😀

Agreed. Seduction is for sure an art form.

I'm too self-absorbed to chase anything hard-to-get

Yeah I can see that. Basic human psychology. You want what you can’t have.

It’s not “hard to get” per say. It’s slowing the pace down. The woman if interested should never turn him down, or imply she isn’t interested.... but to create space and pace the relationship. It supposedly creates higher sexual chemistry, desire and keeps the flame from exhausting.

That whole “things were so great. He liked me so much... he disappeared “...... is supposedly no fault of the mans own... but he has a greater need to pace, and the woman’s job in a traditional dating sense... is to slow him down. It also creates value and investment.

Interesting to me.

Posted by Evoxxxscorpio3
A bit of a chase is good. But too much of it is a turn off.

Totally! For anyone it would be!

It’s more like they suggest if a man says want to get coffee Thursday you might reply “I’d love to, but I am not free until next Tuesday”. It creates personal value and sets a pace.

I don’t know. Every relationship I’ve had has been super fast. Maybe they lasted for 4 years but it generally under stressful circumstances. I think there could be something sound to this. Let him ask you out 80% of the time.... always be respectful, let him pursue... but set a pace.

Maybe I’ll try it out! Haha

pacing yes, but don't micromanage or it will become a turn off.

Also: only start pacing when you are actually intimate, don't pace when the man is trying to set up dates to know each other because aint nobody got time for this bs.

But I am of the opinion that the people should put themselves out there the sooner possible and learn to accept each other's flaw and work from there, so I don't really believe in that seduction bs, but to each their own.

Posted by heliumfiasco
It’s more like they suggest if a man says want to get coffee Thursday you might reply “I’d love to, but I am not free until next Tuesday”.

not at the very beggining, also if you keep doing that the pattern might become predictable and tedious

is just people using the "sunk-cost fallacy" in hopes of keeping a relationship doomed to fail, a little longer.

in the best case scenario it forces people to work a bit more in the relationship to make it "work" in order to avoid wasting all that "investment" they did in the beginning.

such a sad way to create a relationship.

Posted by hydorah

Posted by heliumfiasco
It’s more like they suggest if a man says want to get coffee Thursday you might reply “I’d love to, but I am not free until next Tuesday”.

not at the very beggining, also if you keep doing that the pattern might become predictable and tedious

click to expand

Yeah, I can see how that might get very tedious. I’m assuming this is just a general outline of how things should go.

Posted by Endless
is just people using the "sunk-cost fallacy" in hopes of keeping a relationship doomed to fail, a little longer.

in the best case scenario it forces people to work a bit more in the relationship to make it "work" in order to avoid wasting all that "investment" they did in the beginning.

such a sad way to create a relationship.

I don’t think it’s coming from a game stand point. It’s about slowing the process down the first year. As to not burnout. It’s not pretending to be disinterested, or otherwise. It’s not about anything fake or forced. It creates a lighter dating atmosphere. Keeps interest longer by not getting bombarded. But typically men like to feel in control, so they pursue, women pace.

I don’t think it sounds manipulative. It’s basically date timing.

You think it’s manipulative?

do you enjoy dating at all or is it just a job?

Posted by WeetzieBat

Posted by Endless
is just people using the sunk-cost fallacy in hopes in keeping a relationship doomed to fail a little longer.

in the best case scenario it forces people to work a little bit more in the relationship to make it "work" in order to avoid wasting all that "investment" they did in the beginning.

such a sad way to create a relationship.

Half the stuff that gets posted, I'm just like...why do people suck so much? lol

click to expand

A discussion on opinion of dating style makes people suck? You probably should leave the internet, or at least forums then. This is just merely a conversation about a psychology theory on creating personal chemistry in the long term. Is this not a place to discuss such topics?

Posted by hydorah
do you enjoy dating at all or is it just a job?

I’m not saying this is right or wrong. I just think the theory is interesting.



Do I enjoy dating? Sometimes, sometimes not. I never think of it as a job. But I think most relationships these days burnout quickly. Have less longevity. But everything is very high paced. That perhaps there is some substance to this?

Posted by heliumfiasco

Posted by Endless
is just people using the "sunk-cost fallacy" in hopes of keeping a relationship doomed to fail, a little longer.

in the best case scenario it forces people to work a bit more in the relationship to make it "work" in order to avoid wasting all that "investment" they did in the beginning.

such a sad way to create a relationship.

I don’t think it’s coming from a game stand point. It’s about slowing the process down the first year. As to not burnout. It’s not pretending to be disinterested, or otherwise. It’s not about anything fake or forced. It creates a lighter dating atmosphere. Keeps interest longer by not getting bombarded. But typically men like to feel in control, so they pursue, women pace.

I don’t think it sounds manipulative. It’s basically date timing.

You think it’s manipulative?

click to expand

I don't care if it is manipulative at its core or not (look at my moon), some people do it naturally some don't.

but if someone invites you to a date and you say no, without reason, only to create space, you tell me which one it is.

its your choice, that's what it is, but a relationship wont work more because of it, that's a fallacy.

and that's my point.

Posted by TheRabbit

Posted by Smidge
Handsome? WHERE

She's right though

click to expand

there's men on this website??

Posted by Endless

Posted by heliumfiasco

Posted by Endless
is just people using the "sunk-cost fallacy" in hopes of keeping a relationship doomed to fail, a little longer.

in the best case scenario it forces people to work a bit more in the relationship to make it "work" in order to avoid wasting all that "investment" they did in the beginning.

such a sad way to create a relationship.

I don’t think it’s coming from a game stand point. It’s about slowing the process down the first year. As to not burnout. It’s not pretending to be disinterested, or otherwise. It’s not about anything fake or forced. It creates a lighter dating atmosphere. Keeps interest longer by not getting bombarded. But typically men like to feel in control, so they pursue, women pace.

I don’t think it sounds manipulative. It’s basically date timing.

You think it’s manipulative?

I don't care if it is manipulative at its core or not (look at my moon), some people do it naturally some don't.

but if someone invites you to a date and you say no, without reason, only to create space, you tell me which one it is.

its your choice, that's what it is, but a relationship wont work more because of it, that's a fallacy.

and that's my point.

click to expand

Of course this can’t create chemistry where it doesn’t exists. It’s not turning down a date either, it’s stretching the time in between dates. Slower pace, to maintain the spark.

I think maybe in a time where people are texting all day, seeing each other on social media... etc. it might not be a bad thing.

I see your point though, and it’s valid.

Posted by Juliiette

Posted by heliumfiasco
So, ive been reading up on dating psychology. I have read exclusively (like literally every source) say that a man will not get into a relationship with a woman he doesnt feel he had to invest in. Not monetarily but that he had to put in sufficient effort. That things were not super easy. In the sense of establishing the dates, he is more apt to want a women who actually declines the first date, but suggests a second date to counteract. That a woman has to set the pace or a man "burns himself out". Example... if a woman and man have sex and its great, and he says lets see each other tomorrow... she declines but offers a date down the line. Not rejecting him at all, but creating space.

Now I know that "hard to get" is a common game... but this is different. It's stating that men get very heated up when interacting with women, so that a woman slowing his pace down, makes for relationship longevity. That it is crucial for a woman to allow for a slow simmer for the first year. If she wants to last past the year mark. Basically men get overly hyped but rarely can maintain that level.

Men are the pursuers, women the pacers.

Thoughts?

Idk this sounds like women are for the kitchen and men are for science. Sooo outdated. Though i belive it's true for many people. Not my thing though, nor i would have a partner with such mentality. I'm sure they would find me annoyingas well so it's all good.

click to expand

Oooffff I didn’t really see this as a sexist thing. More the woman taking control of the time spent to sustain heightened attraction. Hmmmm

I still don’t see it as game playing. Haha. like at all. I think faking disinterest would be. Trying to be hard to get would be. But spreading time doesn’t seem like a game. I mean- it is a strategy, sure. But I think we’re simple creatures.... too much of anything too quickly loses its spark.

Throwing yourself full in, giving someone your all within 4 months. Where is the continued desire? Where is the sustained mystery? If this is your person.... you’ve got 40 + years with them. What’s the harm in building value, keeping suspense peaking? That excitement about the next meet up? That’s what’s exciting about falling in love in the first place. Keeping that at a summer sounds sexy. Not disrespectful or manipulative.

I’m glad I posted about this. I like hearing everyone’s ideas!!!



For the record. I’m the girl who after 6 dates typically is about to move in with someone... I go charging in. But I think I might try the summer for my next one!

Simmer* not Summer! Haha

Posted by Pleistoanax

Posted by MyStarsShine

Posted by Pleistoanax
I could enlighten you on this but since I'm not qualified my hands are shackled by your rules.

You don't need to be qualified to pass an opinion

It's wouldn't be a subjective opinion though.

click to expand

No problem

We are all ears......carry on 😊

Posted by Juliiette

Posted by heliumfiasco

Posted by Juliiette

Posted by heliumfiasco
So, ive been reading up on dating psychology. I have read exclusively (like literally every source) say that a man will not get into a relationship with a woman he doesnt feel he had to invest in. Not monetarily but that he had to put in sufficient effort. That things were not super easy. In the sense of establishing the dates, he is more apt to want a women who actually declines the first date, but suggests a second date to counteract. That a woman has to set the pace or a man "burns himself out". Example... if a woman and man have sex and its great, and he says lets see each other tomorrow... she declines but offers a date down the line. Not rejecting him at all, but creating space.

Now I know that "hard to get" is a common game... but this is different. It's stating that men get very heated up when interacting with women, so that a woman slowing his pace down, makes for relationship longevity. That it is crucial for a woman to allow for a slow simmer for the first year. If she wants to last past the year mark. Basically men get overly hyped but rarely can maintain that level.

Men are the pursuers, women the pacers.

Thoughts?

Idk this sounds like women are for the kitchen and men are for science. Sooo outdated. Though i belive it's true for many people. Not my thing though, nor i would have a partner with such mentality. I'm sure they would find me annoyingas well so it's all good.

Oooffff I didn’t really see this as a sexist thing. More the woman taking control of the time spent to sustain heightened attraction. Hmmmm

Idk. For me it is very. Small town mentality. Strict gender roles. It's our role to sustain sexuality? What? Why? So some peasant would ask me to see me again? I want to treetrunk too? I like sex like men do? Make me want to see you again after? Blah.

click to expand

I can totally see that. I get what you’re saying. I hadn’t really looked at it like that. Of all the comments made, this one really makes me question the idealogy behind it. Which is really why I posted it. To look at all sides of the dating theory. Immmaaa need to sit on this one 🙂

Posted by WeetzieBat

Posted by heliumfiasco
I still don’t see it as game playing. Haha. like at all. I think faking disinterest would be. Trying to be hard to get would be. But spreading time doesn’t seem like a game. I mean- it is a strategy, sure. But I think we’re simple creatures.... too much of anything too quickly loses its spark.

Throwing yourself full in, giving someone your all within 4 months. Where is the continued desire? Where is the sustained mystery? If this is your person.... you’ve got 40 + years with them. What’s the harm in building value, keeping suspense peaking? That excitement about the next meet up? That’s what’s exciting about falling in love in the first place. Keeping that at a summer sounds sexy. Not disrespectful or manipulative.

I’m glad I posted about this. I like hearing everyone’s ideas!!!


For the record. I’m the girl who after 6 dates typically is about to move in with someone... I go charging in. But I think I might try the summer for my next one!

I don't think you can build a lasting relationship with a person who doesn't like you unless you're hard to get.


I was going to write more, but that just says it all.

click to expand

I agree!!!!

I just don’t think that taking things slow= Playing hard to get.

Posted by Juliiette

Posted by heliumfiasco

Posted by Juliiette

Posted by heliumfiasco
So, ive been reading up on dating psychology. I have read exclusively (like literally every source) say that a man will not get into a relationship with a woman he doesnt feel he had to invest in. Not monetarily but that he had to put in sufficient effort. That things were not super easy. In the sense of establishing the dates, he is more apt to want a women who actually declines the first date, but suggests a second date to counteract. That a woman has to set the pace or a man "burns himself out". Example... if a woman and man have sex and its great, and he says lets see each other tomorrow... she declines but offers a date down the line. Not rejecting him at all, but creating space.

Now I know that "hard to get" is a common game... but this is different. It's stating that men get very heated up when interacting with women, so that a woman slowing his pace down, makes for relationship longevity. That it is crucial for a woman to allow for a slow simmer for the first year. If she wants to last past the year mark. Basically men get overly hyped but rarely can maintain that level.

Men are the pursuers, women the pacers.

Thoughts?

Idk this sounds like women are for the kitchen and men are for science. Sooo outdated. Though i belive it's true for many people. Not my thing though, nor i would have a partner with such mentality. I'm sure they would find me annoyingas well so it's all good.

Oooffff I didn’t really see this as a sexist thing. More the woman taking control of the time spent to sustain heightened attraction. Hmmmm

Idk. For me it is very. Small town mentality. Strict gender roles. It's our role to sustain sexuality? What? Why? So some peasant would ask me to see me again? I want to fuck too? I like sex like men do? Make me want to see you again after? Blah.

click to expand

Exactly.

Posted by WeetzieBat

Posted by ValleysofNeptune

Posted by WeetzieBat

Posted by heliumfiasco

Posted by WeetzieBat

Posted by Endless
is just people using the sunk-cost fallacy in hopes in keeping a relationship doomed to fail a little longer.

in the best case scenario it forces people to work a little bit more in the relationship to make it "work" in order to avoid wasting all that "investment" they did in the beginning.

such a sad way to create a relationship.

Half the stuff that gets posted, I'm just like...why do people suck so much? lol

A discussion on opinion of dating style makes people suck? You probably should leave the internet, or at least forums then. This is just merely a conversation about a psychology theory on creating personal chemistry in the long term. Is this not a place to discuss such topics?

It's not you that sucks. It's the whole concept of treating people like commodities. I hate game playing. I don't know why people can't just be authentic.

How does putting space between the time you're seeing someone not being authentic lol. I like doing lots of things but that doesn't mean I do them everyday. Imo putting a little more space between the time you see someone just makes the time you see them even better and more special. And I think it can make the relationship grow better instead of flaming out quick

Because in the OP she says advice she's read says to do this as a ploy. It's not that you don't want to see him Thursday. It's not that you have plans Thursday. It's pretending you can't see him until Tuesday to try to gain a tactical advantage over him (i.e. you're less interested, so you win.) It's game-playing.

As for why I don't like game-playing, see what I wrote above.

click to expand

It’s definitely self restraint as well. But I don’t think discipline to not rush things is game playing. Anything of substance takes time... sometimes you want the initial spark to last longer.... to sustain for long term fun. But it isn’t a ploy. At least in my eyes. Great things should all be in moderation for best results. I think a lot of people struggle with it. I know I have.



I think the main idea is- take it slow, be respectful, set a pace, allow it to simmer not boil, and that will create longevity. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I never said lie. I said if they want to see you the next day to say you’d love to see them again but suggest the following week.

I used the Tuesday/ Thursday situation in a following post as an example. I never said lie about anything. It’s to pace the dates farther apart.

I guess the moral of the story is I don’t see pacing as game playing.



I will say that an interesting question of old school gender roles might be something to consider in this scenario. But it doesn’t mean that the pacing theory for longevity couldn’t be used by either gender.

No faking interest, no lying about dates.... just setting a slow date pace the first year may produce an elevated dating experience long term!

Posted by RockyMountainOysters
Isn't this kinda common sense? Not just in relationships, but in general as well..

You can have too much of anything and you'll get sick of it quick... except money.. but then why are all these caps so damn depressed?

Hahaha! Exactly!

Posted by ValleysofNeptune

Posted by heliumfiasco
I guess the moral of the story is I don’t see pacing as game playing.


I will say that an interesting question of old school gender roles might be something to consider in this scenario. But it doesn’t mean that the pacing theory for longevity couldn’t be used by either gender.

No faking interest, no lying about dates.... just setting a slow date pace the first year may produce an elevated dating experience long term!

Yeah, Idk, I think people are kinda trippin' in here lol. Like do whatever you want, if you just want to go full bore and see someone everyday for a month until you're tired of them you're obviously free to do it and nobody's telling you not to. But not instantly giving into your first desire to see someone or do something isn't "playing games", at least not in the negative, manipulative way. But different strokes for different folks, I just don't see anything wrong with taking things slow with someone

click to expand

Yeah! I don’t see the game in any of it 🤷🏻‍♀️ I’m missing that part!!! I’m trying to see it, I’m open to all opinions. I just don’t see taking things slow and having self control as a game.

Maybe my wording sucked? That is always a strong possibility! Haha

Pacing aka taking it slow more than anything just regulates your own emotions so that you don't fall for the 'hype' and rather get to know this person over time. The slowness of building a relationship creates a clearer view of the person so you don't fall 'head over heels' based on hormones and the novelty of the person but rather that you are getting to know them.

I do agree with Endless that I don't think it creates for better relationships DIRECTLY but indirectly being able to manage your own emotions helps you project a more accurate version of you compared to the insecure/attention seeking portrayal of you at the beginning of the relationship due to anxiety.

It's not a cause/effect but definitely see the correlation because grandma was right, JUST BE YOURSELF. 😉

Just so we’re all clear. I posted for opinions. I enjoy them all! I have no set idea on any of it. I just don’t see the manipulative factor of it.



I’m still clueless and will probably move in with my next boyfriend in a month. Hahahaha

Posted by TheRabbit

Posted by WitchmitchAries

Posted by TheRabbit

Posted by Smidge
Handsome? WHERE

She's right though

there's men on this website??

About the same number as there are "ladies" here.

click to expand

now i really doubt that. its more like 1 out of 20 is my guess.

If a woman decides to play games she'll have a harder time keeping the interest of a man who is confident and has options in love. While human beings all want what we can't have, this strategy doesn't work on everyone. Typically the guys who will stick through these games are the clingers and the players. Clinger are too needy to give up and players simply don't care. So if you're trying to inspire a guy to chase you, just know there's a chance he may not be the guy you want in the end.

Personally I know the game well enough to see through it, but if a woman wastes too much time sidestepping/backing away I'll get bored and stop altogether. I'm a busy guy, so I only pay attention to women who are direct. In fact I'll spend more effort getting to know a woman who is confident enough to drop the games than one who is too busy playing games and following arbitrary dating "rules". There is nothing sexier than a woman who knows what she wants and isn't scared to go get it.

Also know that if a woman has sex with a guy, whatever games she plans on playing after that point will be useless. It's no secret that guys want sex. So creating more obstacles after sex is a quick way to lose a guy. Some guys may stick around a bit to see if they can make any more progress, but many would fine cutting their losses.

Posted by Berzerker
This ideas of how a man and woman should approach properly is a lot of bs, if a man or woman has quality and the relationship has potential don't need all that silly games

Most real post! Attraction or mutual attraction needn’t require a manual or guide. If mutual attraction is there, it happens and nothing keeps that attraction from extinguishing. However, keep in mind that it has to be mutual. The times you hear of game playing and a whole lot of crap about hot and cold behaviour is when one party isn’t truly interested or wholeheartedly to say the least.