The most recent ones--all from the same guy, of course--have contained direct questions of the sort that are at least quasi-reasonable to ask via text message. That is, "are you back in town" and not "hey, why don't we go out on [weekday]" Each time a new one comes in (this is all the same guy we're talking about here), this is what goes through my head, in approximate order.
Oh, look, it's a direct question. And a reasonable one at that. I've got to answer this time.
It would be totally rude of me not to answer. How can I not answer?
I think Sherrie and Ellen would let me respond to this one as long as I wait awhile. OK, I'll wait awhile.
But I'm supposed to be doing this STRICTLY. I am trying to figure out how well the Rules work, even if it drives him away.
Awwww... but I feel so BAD! And he's going to lose interest! He even hinted he would last time on the phone!
OK, hold up. This guy has still not asked me on a proper date. He keeps asking me to block off time, offers to come up with something in the interim, and then comes up with something lame and that requires him to make minimal effort.
Notably, he has carefully avoided suggesting a weekend evening for dates 1, 2, or 3. Instead, he suggests questionable time blocks, at least at first, indicating that he doesn't really care to sacrifice any premium slot.
Once he asks me on a Saturday night date, I can text him. So really, it's at least partly his fault that I can't respond to his text messages.
Yeah, he doesn't know the Rules, so one could argue that it's not fair of me to apply them without telling him.
However, the Rules are designed to protect me from ending up in a frustrating situation with a lazy, selfish man whose own convenience is his clear priority. Been there, done that. This way is guaranteed to avoid ME ending up disappointed, insecure, and anxious.
Conclusion: unequivocally worth it, even if I have to blow him off.
He already started getting passive aggressive about it during the last conversation, so I'm gearing up for a poof or some kind of confrontation about it. As far as I'm concerned, if he's going to get pissed instead of trying a more thoughtful approach, next.
The response I have prepared for in case he does say something about my never responding:
Oh, I'm just not much of a texter. I figured if you want to talk you'll call.
Thoughts? Are there any boys still reading this? Am I horrible? Am I behaving contrary to universally accepted 2010 social norms? Do you think Sherrie & Ellen would relax their Rule from a couple of years ago?
At least one boy is still reading this, and I will reiterate my stance from a couple posts ago...
ReplyDeleteThis guy sounds like the prototypical "next"
How many examples do you need from him before you realize he isn't going to change? He isn't suddenly going to become the bold, take charge guy that has his act together. It takes a real life shift (getting his heart crushed would do the trick) for people to go through that sort of change (and even then it normally doesn't happen).
Yeah, that's ultimately why I don't feel bad about not texting him back. I do not have any delusions that he is going to step up - don't worry. I'm mainly asking about whether my own behavior is rude, and whether you agree with the Rules approach here (that is, refusing to text at all).
ReplyDeleteI guess my next question would be, should I affirmatively "next" it or just allow it to run its course? In this case, I'm going to allow this guy to remain blog fodder until he poofs or explodes. I have to see what the Rules do here.
Another guy reading. Here's what he sees: The girl isn't responding to my texts and is always busy when I try to set up a date. Sounds to me like she isn't interested. Which in this case you aren't -- but you came to that conclusion outside of the "Rules".
ReplyDeleteAs for the rules in question:
1) Texting is a commonly accepted form of communication nowadays. 2) I am a math/logic guy. Creativity isn't easy for me (e.g. I have skipped dinner because I couldn't figure out what I wanted), but that hardly makes me non-boyfriend material. I resent any implication that it does. Now, if creativity is something that YOU are looking for (not some dumbass rule) then absolutely it should disqualify me.
Overall, I am attracted to outgoing women, smart, cute (sound familiar?). However, the Rules make you sound utterly boring. Some girl standing in the corner not looking at me, isn't going to get my attention. In short, I would be attracted to you, but not Rules-you. The Rules make things more difficult for a guy, which are already difficult enough.
Thanks, Anonymous - this is exactly the perspective I was hoping for. Now I have follow-up questions, so I hope you're still here.
ReplyDelete1) If you came to the conclusion that the girl wasn't interested due to her failure to text you back, and you REALLY liked her, would you call her and ask her about it? Call her and see how she acted to you on the phone? Or just give up?
2) Do the Rules make me *sound* utterly boring or do they make me sound like I *act* utterly boring? What I mean by this is that in spite of the Rules, the "me" that you hear in this blog and on the AO (if that's where you're from) does come through in my interactions. I don't think the Rules prohibits this, honestly. I just have to tone it down a little. But if you mean the whole not looking at all before the guy approaches... yeah, I think that Rule is kind of extreme and have not been that great at applying it.
Also, a clarification:
I liked this dude a LOT at first. Seriously was excited about him after I met him. Since then I have backed off of it because of how he has approached dating me, whether because he's not creative or because he's not that interested. I'm willing to accept that there are benign explanations, which is why I'm going to ride this out a little longer. But the risk that he's not that interested in me makes it worthwhile for me to establish strict boundaries until I'm pretty sure he is.
But perhaps I'm suffering from incorrect presumptions about what guys will do before they give up on a girl they really like. If so, please let me know.
Also, the guy called today and we had a nice 15-minute conversation :) Yes, I let it go 5 minutes longer than I was supposed to, but I figured that was an acceptable way to make up a little for my refusal to text.
1) No-Texting alone probably wouldn't deter me, as I know that I abuse email/text (because I am way wittier via written word than spoken). But additionally being unavailable when he tries to set up a date that doesn't fit the right criteria sends the message that you aren't interested. I will stop wasting my time and yours. But I fully admit that I will give up way before other guys, so I wouldn't rely too much on my perspective on that.
ReplyDeleteInput for a date from the woman is appreciated especially early on, I don't know you well enough to know your likes dislikes, so setting up a date can be difficult. It is your date too, and I want you to have a good time. Perhaps I'm not understanding this Rule correctly.
2)For starters it doesn't sound like you aren't yourself when you go into Rules mode. Which IMO is breaking the only rule that should exist. Without going back and looking through some of your party/mixer descriptions, as I was reading them I was thinking that you weren't doing anything and you weren't having fun (at least partly because you were so focused on following the Rules -- maybe that changes as the Rules become more second nature). Whereas your description of breaking the Rules recently sounded like you yourself had a lot more fun. Believe me that comes across.
To follow up on what anonymous guy said...
ReplyDeleteOne of the things about the rules is to build self-esteem internally, which will definitely shine through anywhere she is, any time. A confident, healthy, happy girl will light up a room when she walks in and guys will notice her whether or not she appears to notice them.
A girl who is constantly trolling a party/event for potential mates/dates is doing so because she is a) desperate or more prevalently b) simply looking for external validation. Girls who need constant external validation are not healthy emotionally and will therefor attract to themselves (or seek out and initiate) relationships that will tend to be on the same emotional-wellness level--poor. What do you get? A mess.
In my experience, the guys who are really into you, will make the extra effort to track you down. I go missing for a couple days (not even intentionally, just busy) and all of a sudden my good male friend is either feeling jilted and letting me know it (which I clear up right away... "sorry, just busy") or he's emailing, texting and leaving messages on both my home ph and cell phone.
I really think if I guy feels a connection or particular interest in someone they will find a way to make an effort to contact her. What would a girl do if a guy didn't respond to her. She'd be wondering, "did he get my message(s)?" "Maybe I should email or call just to make sure." Come on. I'm sure truly interested guys do this too, right? Are they really going to give up that easy? If so, then that is also how they will most likely be in others areas of their lives too. So i guess, i would be satisfied with them NEXTing themselves in this way if that's how it's going to play out.
Rulesbreaker, You sound concerned like you might be missing out on something. If that's the case then there's more work to be done. The idea is by setting your standards you will find what you really want--someone to match you and "be a man". If you have to appease him or stroke him this early on to get him to keep playing you will need to do this later too. Do you want to be the one who does all the work later too?
And quite frankly, it sounds like your date guy is just trying to make you feel bad or threaten you to get you to cooperate the way he wants it to go. I don't want somebody like that. I was in a controlling marriage and it's hell. If he's going to do this stuff now, it's only going to get worse. Keep that in mind. You are not harming him by saying yes you want to get together, but he should come up with a plan and then you can check your calendar and coordinate your schedules. If that is a problem, then he is going to be a problem ongoing.
-A Practicing Rules Girl
Lets step back a minute from the texting issue...
ReplyDeleteThis guy won't commit to a weekend date. He has even gone so far as to try and line Rulebreaker up as a standby activity. In my opinion, the rest of the texting argument is moot.
If I were really interested in a girl, I would call her up with a date already planned, then I would ask if she is interested in going out with me. If she said yes, I would already have the date in mind (with some options in case she had any prefences).
No offense to anonymous guy, but when you are just starting out a relationship, the guy has the be the one who drives that sort of stuff. Call her up, ask her if she likes Italian food, if so, suggest the new hole in the wall Italian place down the street. If she doesn't like Italian, have a backup Mexican place in mind. Plan to go play putt-putt, or ice skating, or walk in the park, but don't call up out of the blue without a plan of some sort. Put 10 minutes of effort into research before the phone call so that you can finalize the date on that 1st phone call.
Brody, no offense taken. I understand what you are saying -- and if I really like the girl chances are I will have something planned. But I am saying that I don't think it should be held against me that I can't come up with something more imaginative than Dinner and a movie, but want to something different.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Saturday thing, I started thinking about that more. I am very busy on Saturdays, but am around all the time during the week. For instance, in April I am busy on 3 consecutive Saturdays. In May I am busy every single Saturday. So conceivably, we could date for 2 months and we would never have a Saturday date. It isn't because I'm not interested, it's because I am legitimately busy (as opposed to I'm busy because it means if I accept I have no self confidence).
To reiterate I will give up before most (if not all) men will, because I am quite happy being single and if the woman is playing games and making it harder than it needs to be (and make no mistake these rules are making it harder) I am not going to waste my time.
Anonymous, re: your statement "For starters it doesn't sound like you aren't yourself when you go into Rules mode. Which IMO is breaking the only rule that should exist."
ReplyDeleteDid you mean to say it doesn't sound like I *am* myself? And are you saying that "be yourself" is the only rule that should exist?
Your point of view is greatly appreciated. I think the differences between you and Brody highlight that men are actually NOT ALL THE SAME, something the Rules would not deign to admit. The Rules would probably tell you, Anonymous, that you are not self-aware and you would act differently than you claim. I disagree, though - I do think there are different types and different manifestations of legitimate interest; and different reasons why a guy doesn't behave the way the Rules says he should.
I agree with Anonymous that my behavior MAY deter some guys who actually like me, but I am pretty much guaranteed not to end up in a relationship with a guy who is lazy and/or does not actually like me. This result is the lesser of two imperfect results, at least for now.
The problem I face is that I might actually be more compatible with guys like Anonymous. This is something to grapple with on another day.
You got me to read it. Congrats. I hate this work. Anyhow...
ReplyDelete1) His not giving up a quintessential date night is troubling to me. I had done that to ladies I didn't necessarily want to date, but wanted to roll in the hay with. If it took 3 Wednesdays, I was all for it. I think it points to one of two possibilities: 1) he thinks you are easy/desperate or 2) he's a scumbag like me. I'll assume the latter.
2) People hide in their digital selves far too often. They believe it adequate human interaction when it is a mechanism to shelter themselves from reality. It's easier to say what you want or how you feel in another place than it is face to face or over the phone. It's a cop-out to be text messaging constantly and speaks to the man being afraid of rejection. If he was confident, he'd have no issues face to face.
3) I agree with whoever said that going in with a planned date is good, but try to make the date something you can talk about. Going to a movie seems like an easy enough first date, but it doesn't give you time to connect. Sure you can have coffee or dinner afterward, but the conversation wouldn't be too much different than if you just had coffee especially considering the depth of movies/Hollywood at present. I preferred doing things that were exciting on a mental or intellectual level that were easy to discuss. Prime example was taking a trip to an art museum. You can learn a lot by listening to how someone interprets a painting or sculpture. Plus you can devote time to getting to know someone without it all being like an interrogation. Not at all useful to the discussion, but I digress.
4) I apologize for jumping around, but the dude that only text messages and refuses to call isn't worth it. As for anonymous who said he might give up if you didn't reply to his text messages, that's sad. I hate to say it but, "man up" and just go for it. Worst thing that could happen is she says no and you're back where you started.
5) The passive-aggressive nature of his responses would also be troubling. Especially over something like not responding to a text message. If he's going to get all in a bind over that, you should see what he does when you spill some coffee on his XBOX controller.
6) Sorry for any redundance in my posts.
:D Oh glassjaws, how far we've come since you called me a worthless attention whore.
ReplyDelete1) I tend to agree with this. Jury is still out on whether he's a scumbag, but I fail to see how he could possibly think I'm easy given our interaction. But his actions aren't really consistent with him just wanting to bang me, as he really has not tried anything beyond about 10 seconds of kissing in the car. And he asked me to lunch for our most recent date.
2) concur, but I also acknowledge the possibility that he is secure but lazy
3) concur again. I want a guy who can plan :(
4) concur, but this guy doesn't refuse to call - he ALWAYS calls after he texts, at least thus far. Would he call if I texted back? who knows.
5) concur. But after our most recent phone convo/lunch date, maybe I overstated when I said "passive aggressive." He might have just been trying to be cute. Today he put a feeler out about text messaging in a completely innocuous way, just talking about his own texting habits in a conversation we were having about e-mailing clients at odd times of day. I think he was waiting for me to say something like "I don't get texts" or "I don't text," but I didn't say anything.
Anyway, we shall see.