Girlfriends and Boyfriends—what's so bad about that? Explain if you will!

[Marty]

Note: I raised this topic in reaction to a very helpful, but also very confusing, response I received to one of my recent field reports. I wanted to break it out into a separate thread so that I can get a broader discussion going than if I left it buried at the bottom of one of my FRs. It's essentially a copy-paste job...

There seems to be an odd notion buzzing around this forum at the moment that girls don't want boyfriends. That's not what Chase says at all, at least in my understanding.

What Chase writes in his articles is that if a girl thinks you'll make a good boyfriend candidate, she'll take things slowly so as not to mess up. That includes not rushing headlong toward sex.

And you know what? I'm good with that.

Quite frankly, I don't have an issue at all if that's what girls want to do, because:

• I can get sex elsewhere if I really want—it may not be as romantic and special as it would be with a new partner, but it's still fun
• I'm not so horny that I can't manage a day or two without sex
• I'm not so impatient that I'd write a girl off because she took, say, three weeks to sleep with me as opposed to one day

In summary, to be quite candid, if she's still seeing me regularly in the interim, I don't care. The sex can wait as far as I'm concerned. It really can. Honestly, it's about ten times as much fun kissing a new partner as screwing an old one.

The key phrase above is "if she's still seeing me regularly". What I'd really like is a means of honing my perceptiveness, so that I get an advance warning when a girls is about to just disappear on me—"off the radar", as Chase puts it—and prevent that from happening. Then I could have all the fun in the world seeing girls regularly and if they want to take things a bit slower before we have sex... hey, I'm a patient guy. And I'm having a lot of fun in the meantime.

Suggestions? =)

-Marty

 

[trashKENNUT]

Marty,

What's the problem with all of that?

EXPECTATION SETTING! and yes you are INVESTING YOUR TIME IN HER A WHOLE LOT MORE, THAT IS IF YOU HAVE A LOT OF TIME.

Neither Chase or anyone here said you can get sex on the first date 100% of the time. That's why things like date compression are there to make the girl feels as if she needs to check out her own "rules". But trying to lessen bad precedent is a good practice and PROBABLY it's a need.

Zac

 

[Thedoctor]

What Chase writes in his articles is that if a girl thinks you'll make a good boyfriend candidate, she'll take things slowly so as not to mess up. That includes not rushing headlong toward sex.

And you know what? I'm good with that.

Marty,

You shouldn't be. Ironically, moving fast really has little to do with sex. It has to do with setting the correct precedent (as Zac noted). But mainly it has to do with one thing: Once you're in the boyfriend zone, her expectations for you skyrocket and she expects so much out of you that the "two of you" may never happen. It took me a while to come to that conclusion a few years back cause I had a similar thought process as you. That I could wait a bit for sex and I actually respected her more for doing so. Truth is, every girl will move fast given the right circumstances. The amount of time can vary from girl to girl, but they will almost all move fast, except a very small group of girls that actually wait for marriage (and even then, it still does happen).

It's not to say you can't make anything happen out of the boyfriend zone. But, your chances drop significantly. She'll often end up auto-rejecting because you don't check off every item on her list of what makes the perfect boyfriend. And that has nothing to do with you not being good enough. No man can measure up to these expectations.

The choice is yours: Obey the law of least effort, move fast (as fast as she'll allow), and then decide if you want to pursue a relationship, or invest a lot of time, effort, and money into her, only to have it go nowhere. Another guy will step into the picture and move fast with her. If you like her and want a relationship and will treat her well, then you're doing the both of you a favour by moving fast.

-Doc

 

[Just_Dave]

Hey Marty,

Agreement:
Like Zac said it's all with expectation setting no one said you'll get sex 100% of the time on the first date. I actually got sex on the second meet with this blonde two years ago only cause she had to go pick up her sister and I wasn't chasing her. I hooked up with her several times afterwards that only came to an end because I got into a relationship with a different girl.

Experience: Knowing what you're looking for
Some girls girls are comfortable hooking up with a guy plenty of times before she tries to wrestle him into a relationship. Some girls are completely comfortable hooking with a guy after guy with no worries. Depending on the maturity of the guy or gal some will think you're a relationship just cause you had sex with them. Everyone's perspectives on sex is different from others. Many girls don't have time for relationships so even if you can't get sex the same day, at least try to push for a kiss or something. Treat it like you'll never see her again, don't be afraid to take the risk!

Even if you want a relationship: You have to play it cool
If you've had sex with her. . .
You have to give her the impression that you have more options. She has to see the value of having her as a boyfriend. It's easy to get a FWB to be your girlfriend you just have to frame it right. Instead of seeing her two days increase the number gradually to four, she'll get the idea. It was originally your idea to be in a relationship, but she'll see it as her own idea.

If you haven't . . .
You don't want to put yourself in the boyfriend zone before you've had sex with her though. Like you said she'll take things slower until she no longer views the relationship as sexual. Especially, if you're constantly around her doing friendly things. You'll end up in the friend zone. It's not impossible to keep girls around if you haven't banged them, it's just a lot harder without any previous sexual encounter between you two. She'll be trying to figure out why you haven't made a move and what not. Some girls will be patient with this and others won't be . . .

This is where I stress the fact of talking (approaching girls and going on dates with them) because when you're no longer in the picture the girl who is taking her time will take notice and try to get you back in the picture.

Chase em, don't replace em: Still be a gentlemen
*Respect yourself and your time, if you're not getting what you want seek it elsewhere
*Don't give her the impression that you seek her only for sex, so she doesn't feel used
*Use balance and consistently frame your interactions as sexual so she doesn't confuse you for a friend, boyfriend, buddy etc . . .
*Don't waste time doing friendly activities . . . James Bond doesn't go shopping

Over and out,

Just Dave

 

[Franco]

Marty,

Thedoctor pretty much nailed this one directly on the head. At some point during reading Chase's articles, I think you might have missed the part where Chase mentions why being in the "boyfriend zone" is actually a bad thing.

There's one thing that needs to be set straight that sometimes comes off as confusing to members of this website: being in the boyfriend zone does NOT mean you are going to become her boyfriend! Chase re-iterates this multiple times in multiple articles. The boyfriend zone is NOT where you want to be, and Thedoctor has already given a well-written, clear explanation of why that is the case, so I will not re-state it here.

Chase only talks about the boyfriend zone so that he can explain what happens when you begin to invest in women a lot by doing great things for them without taking them to bed (which is what is truly desired by a woman wanting a boyfriend). In these scenarios, the "lover" always wins -- plain and simple. The lover is who ends up with one-night stands; the lover is who ends up with casual flings; the lover is who ends up with threesomes; and, to no surprise, the lover is also the one who ends up with girlfriends.

Your number one priority when approaching a woman that you wish to pursue romantically (in any way, shape, or form) should be getting to penetrative sex as quickly and as efficiently as possible. Nothing sets a more sexy and powerful frame of you in her mind than taking her to bed faster than any other man has done before, and it's what she really desires deep down. Once you've taken enough women to bed in a speedy fashion and seen how they feel about you afterward (lovey text messages, cute "puppy" cuddling, cooking for you, sending you gifts, etc.), this will really begin to sink in, and you'll likely be hitting your head against the wall afterward because you'd had wished you'd realized it sooner.

So don't dawdle around with women thinking that you are scoring any points with them until you've taken them to bed. Because once you've done that, you won't need to score any more points -- you've already won the game.

- Franco

 

[Richard]

Marty,

When I inboxed you originally the other day, and I said to you that I use sex as a screening device, as a qualifier, and that sex has multiple purposes. These guys have given you more of the purposes behind sex.

It takes you out of the boyfriend zone, and allows you to firmly control the direction you take with the woman. If you get sex from her, you'll be able to get whatever you want from her.

So, if you're looking for a girlfriend (like I was), when you've already given her great sex, you can control the direction the two of you take, and get her to be your girlfriend as a lover, instead of a provider. She knows that the only way to keep getting sex from you is to commit to the relationship (which is the expectation I set), and you don't have to shower her with gifts or monetary wealth to keep laying her (another expectation I set.)

 

[Marty]

Thanks to all contributors for your insightful commentary. I do appreciate the thought that went into this.

Franco:

As usual with your advice, it is taking a while to sink in... Now I see that Chase's immensely useful and detailed analysis of my FR has given me even more to think about—as well as making me laugh out loud: "Sorry that I slipped and fell on top of you and we had sex"—where does he come up with this stuff?! =)

Anyway, now I've had time to process what you wrote a bit, I've narrowed down all the puzzlement that was going through my head to a single key question. You might think it a spectacularly stupid one—but this is the Beginners' board, so I get a pass )

Ignoring sexually repressive societies (e.g. Saudi Arabia) and just focusing on the relatively liberated world we're all familiar with, here's what I'd like to know...

• Do all cute girls take lovers at some stage of their lives?
  

Or is there a significant segment of (attractive) female society who would habitually contemplate sex only within the framework of a relationship?

What I'm really getting at is... with any given girl I meet, assuming I take your field-tested and hard-learned advice and pursue "penetrative sex as quickly and as efficiently as possible", am I in with at least a sporting chance that a girl even goes in for sex in this context, irrespective of my individual attractiveness or otherwise to her?

I ask because, to look at her, the girl I described in the FR (Chase's response to which I linked to above) seemed positively angelic and I'd have thought she'd be shocked at such a suggestion. Maybe I'm just naive

Thanks again!
-Marty