Hence, one may unintentionally attract when truly trying to be aloof.
From the Philanderer by GB Shaw: "The fickleness of the women I love is only equalled by the infernal constancy of the women who love me."
Dreams have been described as dress rehearsals for real life, opportunities to gratify wishes, and a form of nocturnal therapy. A new theory aims to make sense of it all.
Verified by Psychology Today
"Easy things are tempting, but only if they are forbidden to others." Ovid
The wish to be with one's lover is intense and urgent. However, in some cases blocking this wish and the lover's wish can greatly increase your own desirability. Two ways of doing this are "Playing hard to get" (see here) and "The 'in due course' policy." In both cases, blocking the mutual desire out of long-terms considerations should be selective. The advice of "Don't block everything and don't give everything" is sound.
Why should people adopt the above two policies and prevent themselves and their lovers from kissing, touching, and having sex with each other when they really want to do so?
There may be various reasons for doing this. These include, for instance, moral or religious grounds, as in the case when the two people are not married to each other. Here, I will not discuss the different reasons that lovers might take this course of action; my focus will be on long-term psychological and other considerations. Having sex now might be enjoyable in the short term but harmful in the long term.
Since long-term romantic love might have significant and enduring benefits, genuine lovers should be ready to wait and invest a lot of effort, as well as other resources, in order to attain those benefits. Although 'playing hard to get' ensures that the other person is indeed sincere in his commitment to an enduring relationship, the 'in due course' policy helps to make sure that the lover is mature and serious enough for this intimate relationship. In both cases, love must be "earned" and "proved," often by enduring the pain of separation or by not fully implementing activities associated with romantic love.
The policy of 'playing hard to get' is based on the assumption that if a person is perceived to be unattainable, this fans the flames of love and sexual desire. By forcing a person to invest more effort in obtaining the activities he desires, the activities become more valuable. Moreover, the readiness to invest extra effort in order to enjoy these activities indicates the person's sincere wish to be involved in a long-term relationship.
Playing hard to get is indeed a most effective strategy for attracting a partner (especially when used by women to attract men). However, playing too hard to get is problematic as it may make men think of the woman as "cold," "unfriendly," and "frigid." Accordingly, Walster and her colleagues argue the most desirable woman is a selectively hard-to-get woman, i.e., a woman who is easy for the subject to get but hard for all other men to get. Such a woman incorporates the positive characteristics of a hard-to-get woman - "selective" and "popular" - with the positive characteristics of an easy-to-get woman - "friendly," "warm," and "flexible"; a woman with all of these characteristics is a selectively-hard-to-get woman. A woman can intensify her desirability if she acquires a reputation for being hard-to-get and then, by her behavior, makes it clear to a selected romantic partner that she is attracted to him. This psychological finding is in accordance with the above quotation of the Roman poet Ovid who lived 2000 years ago.
The 'in due course' policy is a more serious attitude (and hence it is sometimes attributed to a sage or a grandmother). This policy does not necessarily doubt the lover's sincerity, but involves waiting until the appropriate time before engaging in full romantic and sexual relationships; that is, when both lovers' attitudes are as mature and serious as is necessary in long-term romantic relationships. Since at the early stage of the relationship, the two people still don't know much about each other, it is doubtful whether they can be certain that their liaison will result in a serious enduring relationship. The love of both should mature and only then should its full implementation take place. The 'in due course' policy constitutes a kind of prolonged courtship. Indeed, marital happiness is positively associated with the length of the courtship period.
Like the situation in the case of 'playing hard to get', the 'in due course' policy also cannot be overly rigid or too long. The progress toward a full sexual relationship should be moderate and indicate to the lover that she does love him but still needs time to realize the seriousness of his love and perhaps hers as well. Indeed, a typical question that arises at the end of this courtship period is whether the lover is serious in his love.
To sum up, both the policy of 'playing hard to get' and of the 'in due course' policy are valuable, although being elusive is mainly of value in the initial stages of the relationship. However, the best circumstances for increasing desirability are when transparency is added as well. Showing selective interest is then the best strategy in both 'playing hard to get' and the 'in due course' policy. Both policies work when they signal selectivity. But for the person you are after, you should be easy to get because otherwise he may doubt your love for him.
The above considerations can be encapsulated in the following statement that a lover might express: "Darling, I know that showing selective interest just in you might make me most desirable to you, but what about fulfilling my desires? Can those be entirely fulfilled by you alone? I doubt it."
Hence, one may unintentionally attract when truly trying to be aloof.
From the Philanderer by GB Shaw: "The fickleness of the women I love is only equalled by the infernal constancy of the women who love me."
This Assessment is an illusion. By focusing on the result of the treatment, people misdiagnose the disease and the cure. (chemo doesn't cure cancer, it just kills cells.) None of these things matter to the mature or the sincere. No mature adult looking for a long-term commitment from a particular person needs to be conned into it with head games and by assessing their own and others' relative value on the open market (who wants a relationship with someone who does?? Low self-esteem or high, that makes Everything a tightrope walk, no matter how long the rings have been on.) So Please stop selling this one. What the resulting *behavior* of these tactis is really doing is signaling *priority* and value of the chosen, not the chooser. The chosen still responds *depending on how *they* value the chooser*, regardless of their chooser's value to everyone else. Listen, if you're choosing a jerk, the very fact that you make them a priority to them signals receptiveness to abuse or lowers your value no matter *how* or when you do it and whoever else wants you. If you're choosing someone who isn't a jerk and wants to be there, it won't matter how many other people are or aren't beating down your door, if you are stable and sincere and consistently showing them their own value, they will do the same.
I.e., If it takes universal desirability to attract or keep that someone, I got news: they were an a$$hat to begin with. Good luck holding on to their leash.
I believe these approaches inflate the value of intimacy or sex beyond its fair market value (based on sexual pessimism). There's no need for Juvenal games when both parties display mutual respect for each other. Satisfying each other's needs can and should include sexual activities. If the relationship continues over time, it is based on honesty and mutual desire not some strategic persona.
Bruce
Im always very pleased reading Dr Ben-Zeév posts that I find hard to believe this post was written by him.
I read it time and again and it sounds shallow and naive to me, very shallow, contrary to the deep thoughts and knowledge he wisely displays in other posts.
First, playing hard to get may be ok for teenagers and immature people, or for people who just like to be entertained, excited and amused, but not for serious, grown up people who dream of a long lasting loving, compassionate relationship.
The fact that a woman plays hard to get and the man is persistent tells the woman nothing about the sincerity, the seriousness and the intrinsic goodness and kindness of that man as a potential partner. It tells her he is persistent but nothing can be concluded about his real motifs, his core values, his human nature, etc. (Hitler was very persistent in his goals. That alone tells us nothing about his goal's mad nature.)
Playing hard to get deviates and distorts the importance of deeply knowing and getting in touch with a potential lover. It sets a game in which "you should do some serious effort to get my love and my attention" And I define what is "serious effort". In the same way a prize is won, I cosify myself and I become a prize. And I set the rules of the game. Those longing for me should strive and work hard to get me, according to my rules.
By doing so, instead of giving myself the serious and unavoidable task to really get to know deeply a potential lover, I just simply set a game that is easy and amusing to play and see how it develops. Then, I reduce and oversimplify the vast experience of getting to know a human being.
Such "playing hard to get" might be related with having some wild fun and feeling excited to play it. But it can not be related with true love.
Now, if playing hard to get is played selectively, then it can not be named "playing hard to get" at all. A woman who plays hard to get with men she doesn't like in the first place, and at the same time she is easy with a specific man she likes, then she is not playing hard to get. She is just refusing what she doesn't like and accepting what she actually likes. Nothing new here.
The "in due course" game is also a mistake. While I don't consider sex should be praticed at all times with anyone who comes in handy, I consider that two mature people might responsibly get into sexual relationships as long as they both know they truly want to do it. Sex shouldn't be pushed in into an agenda, but it also shouldn't be pushed out. It is something that should come as a natural result of the relationship itself. But, alas, it should always be done responsibly no matter what. Sex is not going to make you love someone.
The important thing is never forget your sex partner is a human being so make sure never cosify him/her as a sex object.
No matter how amazing he/she is when having sex, he/she is a human being, not a sex machine, and a lot more can be explored with him, not just sexuality.
If one looks at a potential lover as a human being, with all of his/her vast potentialities and not just his/her sexual ones, then one is ready to engage in sexual relationships.
Congratulations to Dr Ben-Zeév because I love all of his other posts and he is clearly a very wise man. Besides, it was highly time a philosopher showed his opinion on this love matters.
Cheers!
Joe
Life is too short to play either of these high school games.
I find this article rather interesting. However, I must admit that I am surprised that 'playing hard to get' is still being encouraged. Especially since we live in a world which is becoming increasingly connected via social media networks.
This has resulted in individuals being supplied with a wide array of choice when it comes to selecting what type of mate one would like to be with. Hence, playing hard to get is more likely to damage your chances of ever being able to find a true soulmate (if that is what you're after) as opposed to helping you in this process.
Life is way too short to be wasting it by playing games. Follow your heart and trust your instincts and just wait for everything else to fall into place...
A fact clearly with demonstrated by the responses to this post!
Indeed, "playing hard to get" does sound like encouraged manipulation, but in fact it represents a non-politically correct truth for women: a man who is worthy of one's affection will indeed endure "the wait", while a man who has to "earn" or "prove" his affection to a woman over the course of time, will value that woman more.
Steve Harvey, a popular comedian, made millions in book sales and movie profits illustrating this very principle and I have yet to see much "Harvey bashing" for speaking this very unpopular truth.
Indeed, Steve Harvey is not the only man to popularize this truth in the national media and through book sales..."He's just not that into to you" comes to mind as another instance where a man is honest about a man's perception of a "value" woman.
I appreciate this honest post, which I view as a truly helpful affirmation of my need as a single woman to "maintain a distance from intimacy" with a man until I am sure we both are true in our affections. This tenet has saved me from the embarrassment of rejection and the powerlessness associated with having intimate relations with someone truly not interested in a healthy and whole relationship.
Thank you, for this insightful and compelling article!
"Playing hard to get" does not only sounds like encouraged manipulation, it actually is encouraged manipulation!!
A simplistic myth that has been perpetuated just because some people think it is the right thing: "a man who is worthy of one's affection will indeed endure 'the wait', while a man who has to 'earn' or "prove" his affection to a woman over the course of time, will value that woman more."
That so called unpopular truth is actually a popular lie
That tenet has only spared you from the deep complex process of knowing yourself and a man who might be truly interested in a healthy and whole relationship.
But if a woman wants to have an a priori certainty of what a man truly wants she is simply self deluding and a man can easily take advantage giving her what she wants just in the beginning... later... who knows?
Women don't want to understand love and a healthy and whole relationship is something to be built not something that is promised a priori.
Women prefer rosy tinted scenarios where there are no risk to take, fitting only a rosy imagination.
Women don't want to face the truth that whatever is worth in life implies risks, nothing comes as a priori knowledge and there are no warranties in life, let alone in love...
That said, I don't mean just lay down with any John in the street. But face the truth, playing hard tampers your chances, does not help you and only confuses you and a potential great person.
Best Details Styles With Good Package Delivery To You Enjoy,Our Polo Clothes Will Bring To You With So Many Surprise.
nroth face outlet http://www.outletnorth.org
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.