She says the movie looks dumb; you suddenly agree. She tests you with a little attitude; you apologize for nothing.
You think you're being easy to get along with. She reads something else entirely: a man with no edges. Nothing to hold on to. No friction, no tension, no reason to wonder what he really thinks.
The "22 Rules" taught me to push back — playfully, calmly, without needing her approval. Strange things happened after that.
Dinner ran three hours. She laughed at everything. You walked her to her car thinking this one's locked in.
Then: nothing. Two texts. No reply. What happened?
You did what most men do on a great date. You filled every silence, answered every question, and left her with nothing to wonder about. No mystery. Nothing to sit with when she got home.
Rule 3 of the "22 Rules" changes the ending: tell her a little, hold back the rest, and let her imagination do the chasing. The ghosting stops too.
Exactly. Post of the dayFrancisco d'Anconia said:When considered, it's not much different than why men cheat; unfulfilled needs.
She asks it casually, mid-sip. And you feel the floor open up, because the honest answer is work, gym, and a couple shows you're half-watching.
Women rarely say this out loud, but a man with a life is attractive before he says a word. The guy who spent Saturday deep-sea fishing and came back with photos and a story — he walks in already interesting.
The "22 Rules" pushed me to build a life worth talking about. Turns out the fastest way to be interesting to women is to be interested in your own life first.
IT'S NEVER INNOCENT FLIRTING. A woman has no business pursuing any prolonged flirting with any man while in a relationship. Same thing with going to clubs. They have no business doing these things. It always "just happens" and people take no responsibility that "I just like flirting and preferred wild sex and male attention at the expense of my relationship." Nooooo, of course not... "it happened to me." Things don't just happen. Someone or you made it happen. Trash.The first few months were fine, but I soon found myself becoming extremely attracted to my lab partner, Henry. What began as innocent flirting eventually wound up with us in bed. After the program was over, I returned home to Greg.
It might not be much different, but the way it's looked at is entirely different. When men cheat they're "dogs" "players"..when women cheat it's because he wasn't attentive enough, he didn't do this right, or that right. See how women assume the victim role?Francisco d'Anconia said:When considered, it's not much different than why men cheat; unfulfilled needs.
You made your case like a lawyer. Stable job. Good guy. Ready for something real. All true. All irrelevant.
She weighed your points, nodded along, felt nothing — then fell hard for some tattooed bartender with a motorcycle and a gambling problem.
Logic is where attraction goes to die. The "22 Rules" work a level deeper, on the subconscious switches that decide within minutes whether you register as a MAN or as part of the furniture.
Stop presenting evidence. Start flipping switches.
I totally agree. Total double-standard that comes from outdated notions of chivalry.Mr_knowit_all said:It might not be much different, but the way it's looked at is entirely different. When men cheat they're "dogs" "players"..when women cheat it's because he wasn't attentive enough, he didn't do this right, or that right. See how women assume the victim role?
A lot of women have figured out that real power comes from playing the victim. If you can demonize men, you've pretty much got a free ride through life.
Eh, labels are as subjective as the labeler. Perhaps if men could give a voice to the reasons why they cheat it may not have such a bad face. Understand that not all women will call guys "dogs" or "players" if they weren't let to believe that there was any exclusivity, the ones that do are more than likely female AFCs who allow themselves to be taken advantage of numerous times. The real difference that I've noticed between infidelity is that women are better at it.Mr_knowit_all said:It might not be much different, but the way it's looked at is entirely different. When men cheat they're "dogs" "players"..when women cheat it's because he wasn't attentive enough, he didn't do this right, or that right. See how women assume the victim role?
A lot of women have figured out that real power comes from playing the victim. If you can demonize men, you've pretty much got a free ride through life.
Gold.THE_ADDMAN said:Guys, if you keep fixing yourself to satisfy each of her problems, she'll just keep giving you problems to fix. And where does that leave you?
Cmon, whos she trying to fool? Thats not reality me girl.Reason #7: To give him a taste of his own medicine
“My last boyfriend was a total player before we got together. I thought I could change him, but I was wrong. I always heard rumors that he was hooking up with other girls while we were dating, but he always denied it. One night, I got a call from a girl he had been seeing, and she detailed their three-month-long relationship to me and told me about another girl she had discovered he was seeing as well. I was so mad that I went out with my friends that night, dressed to kill, and went home with the hottest guy I could find; I felt like it was the least he deserved! I loved seeing the look on his face when I told him about what I did and that I knew about the other girls. And then I dumped him!”
– Ashante, 25, College Park, GA
Excellent post. You've succinctly identified the main problem in most contemporary relationships. Guys are entering the woman's reality. They're going to counseling, learning how to be a better mate. But what about the female? It's almost ubiquitous in today's society how men are made to be apologetic buffoons, who should be happy to have a snotty, controlling wife.THE_ADDMAN said:yup. from that article, I didnt see any remorse from the words of the girls. most of them felt their boyfriends deserved it.
The "give him a taste of his own medicine" gave it away. Not that it is right for the guy to cheat, but the reason, and the fact that she enjoyed seeing the guy's face when he found out.
Milrenkb, your list for nipping it in the bud has lots of good information, but what I find, and that list supports this, is that its always the MEN who have to change to suit the womans needs. its the MEN who lack the passion. its the MEN who have to share her interests, so she doesnt run off and cheat with another guy who DOES share her interests. (and think of it the other way, if the woman has no passion and the guy cheats, how "justifiable" is it?)
Guys, if you keep fixing yourself to satisfy each of her problems, she'll just keep giving you problems to fix. And where does that leave you?
She calls you when her car breaks down. When she needs help moving. When some guy she's actually dating treats her badly.
You're the listener. The reliable one. The guy who would treat her so much better, if she'd just open her eyes.
She won't. You trained her to see you as the low-effort option — the friend who requires zero risk and zero investment. Every favor dug the hole deeper.
The "22 Rules" break the pattern. You'll stop auditioning for a role she already cast and become the man she chases instead. It starts with Rule 1.
I don't think we're upset about contributing to a relationship. I think the point trying to be made here is that an unfair burden is placed on men when it comes to relationships.Francisco d'Anconia said:I can see why some of you guys are so upset, you feel that contributing to a relationship means that you're being taking advantage of. Understand that people seldom go into a relationship expecting to cheat, they only consider it if a need isn't being met. Not everyone can fulfill those needs. No reason to get upset about it, it's just a fact.
"Men are men"?Mr_knowit_all said:Francisco, I'm glad to see you're big on accepting responibility, but I don't think it's wrong to point out unfairness when it's warranted. A lot of your posts have an undertone to them that gives the impression that you're above the fray, and we're just whiners for complaining about this stuff. While I agree that a lot of our problems are caused by our own issues, sometimes that's not the case. Men are men; we're not superhuman.
I think you misinterpreted what I meant when I said men are men. What I was saying is that men don't have magical powers to know how to react in every situation, and if they make a mistake, that doesn't let the woman off the hook entirely.Francisco d'Anconia said:"Men are men"?
[rant=on]
C'mon, this is what I'm talking about, as if men are less than women just because.... I get the feeling that you guys are getting this "above the fray" impression of me not entirely because because I ambut because you guys believe you aren't! What kind of noise is that? Anyone, and I do mean anyone has the ability to sever the fray. Keep in mind what David Deangelo says when confronted by an obstacle, "Nothing I can't handle..."
I was talking to some guys over the weekend about this very thing, about how men are denigrated via the media which feeds the psyche of impressionable women. First and foremost, this doesn't include all women, just the problematic ones. YOU HAVE THE POWER TO AVOID THEM! But what one of the guys told me that he read that it's a new era for men if they choose to embrace it; a "Menaissainse."
It's a time that men stop complaining about the stereotypes (and also fulfilling them) and make a change, to do something different; to make their own rules and adhere to them and Cosmo be damned! It doesn't take a Herculean effort to do it either. We're supposed to be the more logical and analytical of the sexes. Why is it always a "us against them" attitude when it comes to women. We have enough of our own resources to not only learn how women function but to also find the best course of action to engage them.
We have control over our actions as well as our attitudes. An article like this should be gold to us giving insight into what women are thinking and their subsequent actions. But somehow threads end up talking about just saying "screw it" and implying that it's a losing cause. It's only that way if we let it. I really feel that if guys took time to understand what drives women they would cut their frustration by half, or at least feel that they have a chance.
All men have the ability to:
- Sarge whomever they want
- Next whomever they want
- Do any thing which they want
- Re-act any way that they want
These things alone evens the playing field for every individual man, if only he chooses to take advantage of it.
[/rant]
She calls you when her car breaks down. When she needs help moving. When some guy she's actually dating treats her badly.
You're the listener. The reliable one. The guy who would treat her so much better, if she'd just open her eyes.
She won't. You trained her to see you as the low-effort option — the friend who requires zero risk and zero investment. Every favor dug the hole deeper.
The "22 Rules" break the pattern. You'll stop auditioning for a role she already cast and become the man she chases instead. It starts with Rule 1.