Attainability.. that seem quite a paradox to me…
Some thoughts and questions on attainability:
Attainability issue from a man make sense:
He saw a woman that he judge out of his league and so don't dare to approach her.
(easy enough to understand: he play safe to avoid rejection instead of playing to win)
From a woman, it seems weirder:
A guy that she judge out of her league approach her, flirt with her and invite her on a date… …and she freak out and goes into autorejection.
… but wait! The very fact that the guy move up to approach her and flirt with her and ask her out on a date should be proof enough that the guy is interest isn't ? How she could be afraid of the guy being not interested while there is an EXPLICIT proof (not the weird confusing indirect kind of stuff that women throw at us) of the opposite???
My suspicion is that the woman in autorejection read the situation as "He's interested by my vagina but not at all by me. So he will disappear as soon as we're done bumping the ugly parts." (which make sense if she's looking for a boyfriend, much less when looking for a lover).
But if I'm right, that mean that women are somehow engaging all the interaction, even a one-night stand through a relationship perspective… even when the option is not at all on the table.
So for them, even if it's only a one-night stand, even if they are NOT interested with pursuing any kind of relationship with you, she is STILL using the "relationship control grid" to judge you and evaluate you. Wich lead to strange paradox like using autorejection on you because you are only interested by sex even when it's what she's looking for. It's seems because she only have one tool to evaluate a man's interest and use it even in inappropriate (or at least not optimal) context.
Is that correct?
Could someone explain this a little bit more to me?
Some thoughts and questions on attainability:
Attainability issue from a man make sense:
He saw a woman that he judge out of his league and so don't dare to approach her.
(easy enough to understand: he play safe to avoid rejection instead of playing to win)
From a woman, it seems weirder:
A guy that she judge out of her league approach her, flirt with her and invite her on a date… …and she freak out and goes into autorejection.
… but wait! The very fact that the guy move up to approach her and flirt with her and ask her out on a date should be proof enough that the guy is interest isn't ? How she could be afraid of the guy being not interested while there is an EXPLICIT proof (not the weird confusing indirect kind of stuff that women throw at us) of the opposite???
My suspicion is that the woman in autorejection read the situation as "He's interested by my vagina but not at all by me. So he will disappear as soon as we're done bumping the ugly parts." (which make sense if she's looking for a boyfriend, much less when looking for a lover).
But if I'm right, that mean that women are somehow engaging all the interaction, even a one-night stand through a relationship perspective… even when the option is not at all on the table.
So for them, even if it's only a one-night stand, even if they are NOT interested with pursuing any kind of relationship with you, she is STILL using the "relationship control grid" to judge you and evaluate you. Wich lead to strange paradox like using autorejection on you because you are only interested by sex even when it's what she's looking for. It's seems because she only have one tool to evaluate a man's interest and use it even in inappropriate (or at least not optimal) context.
Is that correct?
Could someone explain this a little bit more to me?
