This article is in response to The Chase Theory and the Psychology of the Shy Guy.
Notes about Response: Although my responses to articles are usually sharply critical, this author has actually moved me. This response in no way makes itself out to be a correction; implying the previous article was in error. This response does not even make itself out to be an expansion; implying the previous article failed to elaborate on key points. Rather, this article is simply a compliment; an articulation of the same ideas, using different words.
Psychology:
Two elements of psychology that transcend gender are: (1) extroversion/introversion, and (2) confidence/insecurity. Both represent a point on a linear spectrum between two extremes. In theory, a person may be 100% confident and 0% insecure; however, in real life, people always fall somewhere in between. Phrased differently, every person is to some degree: (1) extroverted, (2) introverted, (3) confident, AND (4) insecure; simultaneously.
Further, and perhaps more importantly, neither extreme is "better" or "worse" than the other. A person who is introverted may focus on their own personal intellectual or emotional development; this will come at the cost of investing less time and energy in forming more and/or meaningful social connections and relationships. A person who is extroverted may focus on forming more and/or meaningful social connections and relationship; this will come at the cost of investing less time and energy on their own personal intellectual or emotional development.
Similarly, confident people will act on what they believe they are able to do, when they are truly able to do so in reality; those same people however, will also act on what they believe they are able to do, even when they are truly not able to do so in reality. Insecure people will not act on what they believe they are not able to do, even when they are truly able to do so in reality; those same people however, will also not act on what they believe they are unable to do, when such is also the case in reality.
Formation:
Everyone starts out as an "ignorant wanderer." They are not confident, nor are they insecure. They are not extroverted, nor are they introverted. These elements of their psychology are formed during child development; and once formed, are presumed permanent!
Extroversion: (1) soft and encouraging parenting; (2) environment encouraging personal expression; (3) favorable first instance of attempted socializing.
Introversion: (1) strict and authoritative parenting; (2) environment discouraging personal expression; (3) unfavorable first instance of attempted socializing.
Confidence: (1) positive attention; (2) positive external validation; (3) positive internal rationalization.
Insecurity: (1) negative attention; (2) negative external validation; (3) negative internal rationalization.
Examples (Extroversion/Introversion):
Extroversion: John's parents are artists; his mother is a piano teacher and his father is a writer. John's personal ideas and individual expression were encouraged and rewarded as a child. When John was over the age of 2 year old, he was exposed to other children; since John had no reason to fear an adverse reaction (ie. disapproval) from others, he engaged in social contact freely and openly. The other children accepted his non-threatening contact, and so John developed his extroverted psychological tendencies.
Introversion: Mary's parents are professionals; her mother is a doctor and her father is a lawyer. Mary's personal ideas and individual expression were ignored and sometimes punished as a child. When Mary was over the age of 2, she was exposed to other children; since Mary feared an adverse reaction or disapproval from other children, she did not feel comfortable initiating social contact, but instead kept to herself and waited for others to do so for her. So, Mary developed her introverted psychological tendencies.
Examples (Confident/Insecure):
Confident: John is no Brad Pitt; he is short, overweight, and an aspiring comedian. Nevertheless, whenever John sees an attractive girl, his body seemingly automatically walks over to her and starts talking. Even though John's eyes and ears are receiving the information that the girl is not interested in him, John's brain is unable to process this information. When John realizes that she is not interested in him, John simply rationalizes it by telling himself that she must have already had a boyfriend or was gay (lesbian).
Insecure: Mary is a medical student who works as a Victoria's Secret lingerie model part-time; she has a perfect 4.0 GPA and her measurements are 34C-24-34. Nevertheless, Mary looks at herself in the mirror and feels disgusted with what she sees. Mary always feels she needs to spend more time studying, eat less, exercise more, and be in constant need of losing "an other 5 more pounds." No matter how many people give her positive attention and compliments, she will always rationalize the women as simply feeling bad for her and just being nice, and the men as just trying to flatter and lie to her in order to have sex with her.
Flirting (the REAL Psychology 101 Final):
So far, we know that people have (four) types, irrespective of their gender.
1. Extroverted/Confident(EC)
2. Extroverted/Not-confident(EN)
3. Introverted/Confident(IC)
4. Introverted/Not-confident(IN)
The real question is, what does this mean for men and women? Well, let's answer it!
Men:
EC: This is a guy who loves to socialize, is playful but not challenging, gives compliments freely and isn't afraid to just have fun. This is a man who can freely initiate contact because he enjoys doing so; it's natural to him. This is also a man who seeks entertainment! The word entertainment is flexible; it can be either positive, negative, or both. Men in this category seek a variety of partners (this doesn't mean quantity!). If she's also confident, then a fun emotional spar flirting contest will go on for some time; "the chase." If she's not confident, then he'll enjoy taking part of the opportunity to help her grow emotionally as a person; also an other variation of "the chase;" in fact, more so.
IC: Do you know a guy who isn't exactly a party-animal, but is still popular? He probably doesn't know what the inside of a bar or club look like! He's probably the guy who kicks everyone's @ss in Halo, or fighter games, or always has his character on max level with the best equipment in World of Warcraft? This is that guy! He's good-looking, he's smart, he's going places in life, but he's just not extroverted. I know what you're probably thinking. If this guy doesn't naturally initiate social contact, then how on earth does he date? Well, (1) he's around girls (classes/work/friends); (2) girls initiate social contact; (3) and it's not like he freezes up and he's silent as a rock; (4) he follows through and opens up pretty fast. So the question of what kind of girl an IC seeks, is answered by someone who is extroverted enough to at least affirmatively and clearly initiate social contact first.
(DISCLAIMER: the first two groups of guys I stated are rare! Below, are the other 95% of guys that walk on God's green earth.)
EN: This is the guy who walks up to a girl at a bar with either: (1) a cheesy pick-up line; (2) a corny pick-up line; (3) a sleazy pick-up line; (4) disgustingly fake authoritative confidence; or (5) convincingly fake confidence. In either case, it's the guy who goes home and thinks to himself, either: (1) I'm not tall enough; (2) I'm too tall; (3) I'm fat; (4) I'm skinny and wimpy; (5) my penis is too short; OR (6) my penis is too thin (what? you honestly thought any guy thinks his penis is "too big?") What kind of girl is this guy seeking? Well, he's NOT seeking someone who will initiate social contact. But, he is seeking someone that will validate him. More specifically, he's seeking someone that will continue to validate him, so that he can improve his confidence, while still appearing "externally confident" all along. So what he's really seeking is a girl who can manage his ego and simultaneously help him grow emotionally.
IN: You know the guys who walk up to you are a bar or club? Well, this isn't that guy. First, he's not the IC because he's actually present at the bar or club. Secondly, he's not the EC or EN because he hasn't initiated social contact. Instead, this is a person with the same insecurities as the EN, without the tendency to initiate social contact. I know a lot of these guys; some of them are miserable people (whiners), and some of them are great guys. Their trademark is negativity and pessimism. I knew a guy who got a 1560 on his SAT (back when the SAT was out of 1600). What did he answer me when I suggested he apply to Harvard, Yale & Columbia? "There are people that probably scored higher than me or have more volunteer work, recommendations or a better essay." But this lovely bunch only BEGINS here!
A really good friend of mine, let's call him Frankie, had a crush on this girl. He told me about it, we had a debate of whether I should tell her for him or not. Long story short, SHE actually ended up TELLING HIM "I LIKE YOU." Do you know what he told her? "That's nice." After I was done smacking him, I asked him what on earth he was thinking. He said "she was just probably joking around; she wasn't serious; I'm not going to make a fool of myself just because she wants to play around."
The sort of higher-level thought that occurred to me was what this means for women interested in Frankie (who is a really good-looking and smart guy, but obviously very quiet.) If a direct and crystal clear "I like you" was processes the way it was by him, then how effective would an indirect "hint" be? How would he process a girl making strong and long eye-contact with him? What about subtle but repeated eye-contact? What about just subtle glances? What about body language? Would he even notice things like that?
And then I thought about something else; who is to say that the EN notices stuff like that to begin with? It could very well be the case that the EN is just a blind-shooter. Maybe the EN also needs that kind of direct crystal clear statement. The only difference is the IN rarely hears it, and when he hears it, only hears it once and then dismisses it! The EN initiates social contact, has the chance to hear it multiple times until it finally clicks!
Women:
Dating is like fishing for women, but my agreement with sa230e's analogy stops there. It takes a fisherman to know about fishing, and I have done my unfortunate penance of several long days on several boats. Contrary to popular belief, fishing is NOT a PASSIVE sport! It's NOT as simple as decorating a shiny pretty lure and just letting it sit in the water while you wait for a fish to bite. As tempted as I am to extend the analogy of fishing onto women and dating, that would be like a fish telling fisherwomen how to catch them!
Instead, I'll compromise by telling you a story about non-other than our good old friend Frankie. We went fishing with Frankie one day. It was my 28th time on that spot, it was his first time fishing. 6 hours later, I had caught 12 fish, 5 of them quite impressive; he had caught a fish so small, I hooked it to my line and used it as bait to catch an other fish. Then his whining started! I hate fishing! I don't understand it! It's so stupid! I'm putting the same fcukn' lure in the same fcukn' water, but I'm not catching sh*t! These fish are so stupid! Why doesn't one of them bite already?!?!?
Well, don't you think fish have better things to do than bite onto your bait, get reeled onto the boat, dumped in a cooler to slowly die until you go back home to cook them and eat them on your BBQ grill? Don't you think fish have seen their friends go missing? Don't you think fish "think" about what is most likely "food" and most likely "bait?" A fish isn't stupid. If you're looking to hook, reel in, and catch a stupid fish; you're only going to rarely end up with those small shrimp-sized fish that other fish will barely eat! Smart fish eat a lot of food, rarely bite, but when they do, they put up the best fights, and they're worth catching; because they're big (and size matters with fish). If you're just putting in your lure and waiting there on the off chance a stupid fish bites, but on the further off chance that this stupid fish is big, but then whining about why no such fish are biting; you're an idiot! If you're whining or calling me a sIut b/c I know how to cast, where to cast, and how to move my bait; consequently, causing those big fish to bite; and then, b/c I know how to reel in those big fish so that they don't break free; then YOU are YOUR OWN WORST ENEMY in learning that which you want to learn!
Men are hunters! Women are fishermen! If you meet a man who's a fisherman, especially if he likes to "catch and release," stay away; major player alert.
But Frankie pretty much personifies most women. Life takes them fishing (for men). They don't have the kind of success they're looking to find; either in quantity or quality. But instead of considering the possibility that THEY (the women) ARE DOING SOMETHING WRONG IN TERMS OF THEIR FISHING, it's much easier to whine and complain about how stupid these men are who don't want to be caught! In fact, women are beautiful and wonderful creatures who don't confine themselves to mere whining but actually take it a step further to insist that MEN SHOULD (1) APPROACH THE BAIT, (2) BITE THE BAIT, (3) HOOK THEMSELVES, (4) REEL THEMSELVES IN, (5) PROPOSE STATING UP THE BBQ GRILL TO COOK THEMSELVES TOO!
o.O
I'm not about to do an EC,IC,EN,IN analysis for women, simply b/c I'm not a woman. However, anyone can reasonably infer that the EC,IC group will be rare, the EN,IN group will be abundantly common, and that all groups will not have features that different from those of men.
I think the principle lesson to take away from this, is that the reason truly confident people are so successful in dating (extroverted/introverted, men/women) is because they spend less time thinking about themselves, and more time thinking about the other person!
So if men spend more time thinking about how they can be better hunters, and women spend more time thinking about how they can be better fishermen (fisherwomen), they would both understand their "prey" a whole deal greater!
Maybe that means that Mary would be less busy thinking about how to (1) not seem easy/desperate/sIutty or (2) seem difficult/hard-to-get, and more time thinking about how Brian might just be overly-conservative in his thinking (especially when it comes to himself) to process her interest in him, much less be aware of her "hints."
Maybe that means that Frankie would be less busy thinking about how (1) there are so many other great guys out there or (2) women want all these things and have all these expectations of men, and more time thinking about how Diana might (1) think too poorly of herself to show more direct signs of interest in him, (2) be afraid of what others might think of her if she shows her interest in him so directly and obviously, (3) not be confident that he might be interested in her and scared of rejection, or fcuk it (4) years of being exposed to the female sub-culture have convinced her of ideas such as "easy/cheap/sIut" as negative things and "difficult/hard-to-get" as positive things, and she strives to be the latter and not being the former; that the reason she was able to be convinced of this in the first place is b/c the ideas prayed on her desire to find a man, be in a relationship and get married, but also her awareness and consideration to what (she thought/was convinced/lead to believe) was important to men! So at least that means she cares! You have to look at the positives; the silver lining in every catastrophe or emotional wreck. The good news is, THAT'S AS BAD AS IT GETS! So what? What do you have to lose? You give her a shot, if those ideas and that mentality is persistent, you dump her and move on. But if you're able to snap her back to reality, then you've found yourself a caring girlfriend!
You've all read enough for one day; THE END!
Notes about Response: Although my responses to articles are usually sharply critical, this author has actually moved me. This response in no way makes itself out to be a correction; implying the previous article was in error. This response does not even make itself out to be an expansion; implying the previous article failed to elaborate on key points. Rather, this article is simply a compliment; an articulation of the same ideas, using different words.
Psychology:
Two elements of psychology that transcend gender are: (1) extroversion/introversion, and (2) confidence/insecurity. Both represent a point on a linear spectrum between two extremes. In theory, a person may be 100% confident and 0% insecure; however, in real life, people always fall somewhere in between. Phrased differently, every person is to some degree: (1) extroverted, (2) introverted, (3) confident, AND (4) insecure; simultaneously.
Further, and perhaps more importantly, neither extreme is "better" or "worse" than the other. A person who is introverted may focus on their own personal intellectual or emotional development; this will come at the cost of investing less time and energy in forming more and/or meaningful social connections and relationships. A person who is extroverted may focus on forming more and/or meaningful social connections and relationship; this will come at the cost of investing less time and energy on their own personal intellectual or emotional development.
Similarly, confident people will act on what they believe they are able to do, when they are truly able to do so in reality; those same people however, will also act on what they believe they are able to do, even when they are truly not able to do so in reality. Insecure people will not act on what they believe they are not able to do, even when they are truly able to do so in reality; those same people however, will also not act on what they believe they are unable to do, when such is also the case in reality.
Formation:
Everyone starts out as an "ignorant wanderer." They are not confident, nor are they insecure. They are not extroverted, nor are they introverted. These elements of their psychology are formed during child development; and once formed, are presumed permanent!
Extroversion: (1) soft and encouraging parenting; (2) environment encouraging personal expression; (3) favorable first instance of attempted socializing.
Introversion: (1) strict and authoritative parenting; (2) environment discouraging personal expression; (3) unfavorable first instance of attempted socializing.
Confidence: (1) positive attention; (2) positive external validation; (3) positive internal rationalization.
Insecurity: (1) negative attention; (2) negative external validation; (3) negative internal rationalization.
Examples (Extroversion/Introversion):
Extroversion: John's parents are artists; his mother is a piano teacher and his father is a writer. John's personal ideas and individual expression were encouraged and rewarded as a child. When John was over the age of 2 year old, he was exposed to other children; since John had no reason to fear an adverse reaction (ie. disapproval) from others, he engaged in social contact freely and openly. The other children accepted his non-threatening contact, and so John developed his extroverted psychological tendencies.
Introversion: Mary's parents are professionals; her mother is a doctor and her father is a lawyer. Mary's personal ideas and individual expression were ignored and sometimes punished as a child. When Mary was over the age of 2, she was exposed to other children; since Mary feared an adverse reaction or disapproval from other children, she did not feel comfortable initiating social contact, but instead kept to herself and waited for others to do so for her. So, Mary developed her introverted psychological tendencies.
Examples (Confident/Insecure):
Confident: John is no Brad Pitt; he is short, overweight, and an aspiring comedian. Nevertheless, whenever John sees an attractive girl, his body seemingly automatically walks over to her and starts talking. Even though John's eyes and ears are receiving the information that the girl is not interested in him, John's brain is unable to process this information. When John realizes that she is not interested in him, John simply rationalizes it by telling himself that she must have already had a boyfriend or was gay (lesbian).
Insecure: Mary is a medical student who works as a Victoria's Secret lingerie model part-time; she has a perfect 4.0 GPA and her measurements are 34C-24-34. Nevertheless, Mary looks at herself in the mirror and feels disgusted with what she sees. Mary always feels she needs to spend more time studying, eat less, exercise more, and be in constant need of losing "an other 5 more pounds." No matter how many people give her positive attention and compliments, she will always rationalize the women as simply feeling bad for her and just being nice, and the men as just trying to flatter and lie to her in order to have sex with her.
Flirting (the REAL Psychology 101 Final):
So far, we know that people have (four) types, irrespective of their gender.
1. Extroverted/Confident(EC)
2. Extroverted/Not-confident(EN)
3. Introverted/Confident(IC)
4. Introverted/Not-confident(IN)
The real question is, what does this mean for men and women? Well, let's answer it!
Men:
EC: This is a guy who loves to socialize, is playful but not challenging, gives compliments freely and isn't afraid to just have fun. This is a man who can freely initiate contact because he enjoys doing so; it's natural to him. This is also a man who seeks entertainment! The word entertainment is flexible; it can be either positive, negative, or both. Men in this category seek a variety of partners (this doesn't mean quantity!). If she's also confident, then a fun emotional spar flirting contest will go on for some time; "the chase." If she's not confident, then he'll enjoy taking part of the opportunity to help her grow emotionally as a person; also an other variation of "the chase;" in fact, more so.
IC: Do you know a guy who isn't exactly a party-animal, but is still popular? He probably doesn't know what the inside of a bar or club look like! He's probably the guy who kicks everyone's @ss in Halo, or fighter games, or always has his character on max level with the best equipment in World of Warcraft? This is that guy! He's good-looking, he's smart, he's going places in life, but he's just not extroverted. I know what you're probably thinking. If this guy doesn't naturally initiate social contact, then how on earth does he date? Well, (1) he's around girls (classes/work/friends); (2) girls initiate social contact; (3) and it's not like he freezes up and he's silent as a rock; (4) he follows through and opens up pretty fast. So the question of what kind of girl an IC seeks, is answered by someone who is extroverted enough to at least affirmatively and clearly initiate social contact first.
(DISCLAIMER: the first two groups of guys I stated are rare! Below, are the other 95% of guys that walk on God's green earth.)
EN: This is the guy who walks up to a girl at a bar with either: (1) a cheesy pick-up line; (2) a corny pick-up line; (3) a sleazy pick-up line; (4) disgustingly fake authoritative confidence; or (5) convincingly fake confidence. In either case, it's the guy who goes home and thinks to himself, either: (1) I'm not tall enough; (2) I'm too tall; (3) I'm fat; (4) I'm skinny and wimpy; (5) my penis is too short; OR (6) my penis is too thin (what? you honestly thought any guy thinks his penis is "too big?") What kind of girl is this guy seeking? Well, he's NOT seeking someone who will initiate social contact. But, he is seeking someone that will validate him. More specifically, he's seeking someone that will continue to validate him, so that he can improve his confidence, while still appearing "externally confident" all along. So what he's really seeking is a girl who can manage his ego and simultaneously help him grow emotionally.
IN: You know the guys who walk up to you are a bar or club? Well, this isn't that guy. First, he's not the IC because he's actually present at the bar or club. Secondly, he's not the EC or EN because he hasn't initiated social contact. Instead, this is a person with the same insecurities as the EN, without the tendency to initiate social contact. I know a lot of these guys; some of them are miserable people (whiners), and some of them are great guys. Their trademark is negativity and pessimism. I knew a guy who got a 1560 on his SAT (back when the SAT was out of 1600). What did he answer me when I suggested he apply to Harvard, Yale & Columbia? "There are people that probably scored higher than me or have more volunteer work, recommendations or a better essay." But this lovely bunch only BEGINS here!
A really good friend of mine, let's call him Frankie, had a crush on this girl. He told me about it, we had a debate of whether I should tell her for him or not. Long story short, SHE actually ended up TELLING HIM "I LIKE YOU." Do you know what he told her? "That's nice." After I was done smacking him, I asked him what on earth he was thinking. He said "she was just probably joking around; she wasn't serious; I'm not going to make a fool of myself just because she wants to play around."
The sort of higher-level thought that occurred to me was what this means for women interested in Frankie (who is a really good-looking and smart guy, but obviously very quiet.) If a direct and crystal clear "I like you" was processes the way it was by him, then how effective would an indirect "hint" be? How would he process a girl making strong and long eye-contact with him? What about subtle but repeated eye-contact? What about just subtle glances? What about body language? Would he even notice things like that?
And then I thought about something else; who is to say that the EN notices stuff like that to begin with? It could very well be the case that the EN is just a blind-shooter. Maybe the EN also needs that kind of direct crystal clear statement. The only difference is the IN rarely hears it, and when he hears it, only hears it once and then dismisses it! The EN initiates social contact, has the chance to hear it multiple times until it finally clicks!
Women:
Dating is like fishing for women, but my agreement with sa230e's analogy stops there. It takes a fisherman to know about fishing, and I have done my unfortunate penance of several long days on several boats. Contrary to popular belief, fishing is NOT a PASSIVE sport! It's NOT as simple as decorating a shiny pretty lure and just letting it sit in the water while you wait for a fish to bite. As tempted as I am to extend the analogy of fishing onto women and dating, that would be like a fish telling fisherwomen how to catch them!
Instead, I'll compromise by telling you a story about non-other than our good old friend Frankie. We went fishing with Frankie one day. It was my 28th time on that spot, it was his first time fishing. 6 hours later, I had caught 12 fish, 5 of them quite impressive; he had caught a fish so small, I hooked it to my line and used it as bait to catch an other fish. Then his whining started! I hate fishing! I don't understand it! It's so stupid! I'm putting the same fcukn' lure in the same fcukn' water, but I'm not catching sh*t! These fish are so stupid! Why doesn't one of them bite already?!?!?
Well, don't you think fish have better things to do than bite onto your bait, get reeled onto the boat, dumped in a cooler to slowly die until you go back home to cook them and eat them on your BBQ grill? Don't you think fish have seen their friends go missing? Don't you think fish "think" about what is most likely "food" and most likely "bait?" A fish isn't stupid. If you're looking to hook, reel in, and catch a stupid fish; you're only going to rarely end up with those small shrimp-sized fish that other fish will barely eat! Smart fish eat a lot of food, rarely bite, but when they do, they put up the best fights, and they're worth catching; because they're big (and size matters with fish). If you're just putting in your lure and waiting there on the off chance a stupid fish bites, but on the further off chance that this stupid fish is big, but then whining about why no such fish are biting; you're an idiot! If you're whining or calling me a sIut b/c I know how to cast, where to cast, and how to move my bait; consequently, causing those big fish to bite; and then, b/c I know how to reel in those big fish so that they don't break free; then YOU are YOUR OWN WORST ENEMY in learning that which you want to learn!
Men are hunters! Women are fishermen! If you meet a man who's a fisherman, especially if he likes to "catch and release," stay away; major player alert.
But Frankie pretty much personifies most women. Life takes them fishing (for men). They don't have the kind of success they're looking to find; either in quantity or quality. But instead of considering the possibility that THEY (the women) ARE DOING SOMETHING WRONG IN TERMS OF THEIR FISHING, it's much easier to whine and complain about how stupid these men are who don't want to be caught! In fact, women are beautiful and wonderful creatures who don't confine themselves to mere whining but actually take it a step further to insist that MEN SHOULD (1) APPROACH THE BAIT, (2) BITE THE BAIT, (3) HOOK THEMSELVES, (4) REEL THEMSELVES IN, (5) PROPOSE STATING UP THE BBQ GRILL TO COOK THEMSELVES TOO!
o.O
I'm not about to do an EC,IC,EN,IN analysis for women, simply b/c I'm not a woman. However, anyone can reasonably infer that the EC,IC group will be rare, the EN,IN group will be abundantly common, and that all groups will not have features that different from those of men.
I think the principle lesson to take away from this, is that the reason truly confident people are so successful in dating (extroverted/introverted, men/women) is because they spend less time thinking about themselves, and more time thinking about the other person!
So if men spend more time thinking about how they can be better hunters, and women spend more time thinking about how they can be better fishermen (fisherwomen), they would both understand their "prey" a whole deal greater!
Maybe that means that Mary would be less busy thinking about how to (1) not seem easy/desperate/sIutty or (2) seem difficult/hard-to-get, and more time thinking about how Brian might just be overly-conservative in his thinking (especially when it comes to himself) to process her interest in him, much less be aware of her "hints."
Maybe that means that Frankie would be less busy thinking about how (1) there are so many other great guys out there or (2) women want all these things and have all these expectations of men, and more time thinking about how Diana might (1) think too poorly of herself to show more direct signs of interest in him, (2) be afraid of what others might think of her if she shows her interest in him so directly and obviously, (3) not be confident that he might be interested in her and scared of rejection, or fcuk it (4) years of being exposed to the female sub-culture have convinced her of ideas such as "easy/cheap/sIut" as negative things and "difficult/hard-to-get" as positive things, and she strives to be the latter and not being the former; that the reason she was able to be convinced of this in the first place is b/c the ideas prayed on her desire to find a man, be in a relationship and get married, but also her awareness and consideration to what (she thought/was convinced/lead to believe) was important to men! So at least that means she cares! You have to look at the positives; the silver lining in every catastrophe or emotional wreck. The good news is, THAT'S AS BAD AS IT GETS! So what? What do you have to lose? You give her a shot, if those ideas and that mentality is persistent, you dump her and move on. But if you're able to snap her back to reality, then you've found yourself a caring girlfriend!
You've all read enough for one day; THE END!
Most Helpful Opinions