Are men natural pursuers? (Page 2)

I'm calling bullsh** on that. Men are not immune from insecurity and they don't like to lay it all on the line if they don't think the odds are in their favor. Every guy I've ever talked to about this has said almost exactly what Chris just said.

Um, if I'm infuriated, frustrated and insulted by a man's behavior chances are.... I'm just not that into him.

You can't just hand an entire gender the keys to your future and let 'em drive. These people are saying that in the interest of playing it safe and protecting your little feelings, you should relinquish control, roll over and play dead. They're say that you can run a country just fine, but you can't run your own life? WTF?!

What happened to the "shh, baby, don't talk" Renee we know and love?

Troy, I disagree. It's not a matter of too much thought; it's a matter of simplicity of thought. If a man is interested in a woman, he will chase her. Ovetta said it oh so much more delicately than I did.

This isn't about a specific scenario or about whether I should call someone (there is no "someone" to call). It's strictly a philosophical issue about the nature of man.

Oy... I'm never going to live that comment down.

Ok, let me try to elaborate. I'm not suggesting we forego our flirting, seducing, charming selves. Lord, no! I'm simply saying that if a man is interested he will pursue a woman. Sure, we women use our charms, our flirtations, our sideways glances, our subtle and not-so-subtle ways, to keep them in pursuit. That's one of the reasons they pursue, for the thrill and intoxicating scent of it. But pursue they will if they are interested. If they don't pursue, it's because they just aren't interested.

My boss has a saying "A man will chase a woman until she's caught him."

Let's take a look at the nature of woman. If she is interested in a man, what should she do? Bat her eyes coyly and wait for her number to come up?

Let's look at the scenario of my dear parents. Ma and Pa (who thought he was the Duke of Earl) met at a college party and necked in his car. Pa didn't call like he promised so a week later Ma sent a Secret Admirer note. Pa thought it was joke sent by another female friend. Ma laid low, but she was hooked on Pa. She quietly made friends with his friends and when the time was ripe, finally came out and told him she liked him (and that she had sent the note) and he needed to take her out on a date. He did. They fell in love. 32 years later they are the happily married and can still be caught kissing in the kitchen. Why can't women pursue again?

Kim, in the case of your dear parents, your mother delicately introduced herself into your father's world. When he became interested, he pursued her - and not until then. I'll bet she didn't have to call him to setup dates or eventually ask him to marry her.

I'm not advocating that women limit their power (as in women can't pursue) or that they downplay their power. I'm saying that men will pursue if they are interested. A woman chasing a disinterested man will not get the relationship she thinks she wants; he's not going to pursue her.

It's a pragmatic issue for me. Men will pursue if they are interested. Pursuing men who don't pursue is a waste of time.

These are my parents, for clarification's sake. She actually chased him for quite some time. I shortened the story quite a bit.... It wasn't like they went on a date and that was that. He wouldn't date her exclusively for quite some time. All sorts of things went on that just make her sound downright stupid. But she knew that's what she wanted and she got it. She pursued him the entire time. She's the "He's not that into you" guy's worst nightmare.

And actually Ma did ask Pa to marry her.

Smugness is a curious attitude when you've already agreed with me. As have Ovetta and Coredump. :-P

Since when has love been a pragmatic issue?

And I'm not advocating that women pursue disinterested men once they know that the man is disinterested.  There's a wide berth between being proactive and being stupid. But starting off the courtship isn't a bad thing.

What's love got to do with pursuit? I'm not talking about love. Kim, how often do you hear your female friends agonize over why their guy doesn't call, hasn't called, is abrupt when he does call? It's not because he has an oedipal complex, relationship baggage, childhood issues, or an overbite. It's because he's not interested! If he were, he'd be pursuing.

I believe that you're talking about pursuit as a means to finding love. If this was about the other obvious end to pursuit we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Yup, I hear that from time to time and I usually advise that they drop it. I'm not saying that women should pursue pointless relationships. In fact, I would never do all that stuff my mom did because I'd be too scared that I was being a sucka! I am saying that women can and should initiate contact and that there is no problem with carrying an equal share of the fledgling stages of a relationship. You just can't expect a man to come in like Prince Charming and do all the work for ya!

Oh, no darlin', I'm just talking about the chase, in general. I think women are too quick to assume that men are incompetent to maintain relationships. We (general gender we) make so many excuses for why they don't call or cancel dates or whatever. Always with the analysis... "his last girlfriend scarred him and now he's reluctant to open up and share his feelings"... when the truth is that a guy is competent to chase. Yes, he needs encouragement to chase, but chase he will if given encouragement.

About 6 months ago, I met a guy at a political debate party (yes, I'm a nerd) and he asked for my number. He never called. I did wonder why (uh oh, analyzing!) he would say he wanted to see me but then never call. I concluded that the simple answer was probably the right answer: he's the kind of guy who says he'll call but doesn't and he just wasn't into me.

Well, hell if the chase is just for sex, that's easy! I absolutely agree that men aren't incomptent when it comes to maintaining relationships and that they can chase. But it's not the man's sole resposibility. Two to tango and all that... Why does there have to be one specific chaser and a chasee? My best (read: most fun) fledgling relationships were the ones in which we both chased and were chased (those also corresponded to the best relationships in general)! My current relationship started like that and, you guessed it, I made the first move!!!

Woooo, I'm glad you posted this. I was soooo bored.

Exactly.

I think it's ultimately up to BOTH partners whether a relationship reaches any given point. Yes, women can say yes or no at any point, but so can men. Men aren't unwitting creatures who just fall into women's traps.

What my entire point is with all of what I said is that assigning pre-destined roles to men and women sells us both short and confines the relationship unnaturally from the get-go. For me to expect Eric to initiate every new phase of our relationship while I'm just sitting there with my veto power means I'm handing him all the responsibility for the destiny of our relationship and most of the power. Well, I wanna play to. I aim to be a 100% equal partner in this relationship... from beginning to end.

Kim,

I'm with you. I don't think I would EVER do what your mom did. I guess she really thought your Dad was worth it. But me being an independent woman, a homeowner, investor, business owner, global traveler and, of course, triathlete, I often find myself at the dinner table with my girlfriends going - and what do I need a man for again? But seriously, I'm a part of a growing group of professional women who look at men who step to them and go - so what do you have that I don't already have? Maybe 30 years ago I would have had to pursue a man just to have a financially stable life but not anymore. I am perfectly content living me life as if I will always be single. I'm an only child so I'm highly independent and high maintenance and have no problem maintaining that high maintenance lifestyle. The guys I do date, however, are uberpursuers. They have to be. If he's shy and not confident in himself as a man I'm liable to walk all over him and that's not good for him or me.

So my longest relationship where marriage was a possibility ironically the guy was the Knight in Shining Armour. He was the stereotypical gallant gentleman. I never opened a door, paid for a meal, or went a month without flowers from him. And basically he ruined me for other men cause that's how I expect all the men I date to act. So for men to get a woman like me he'd have to be a pursuer cause honestly, I'm clueless when it comes to flirting. I'm an Extorvert for God's sake. I'll talk to anything with a pulse. I flirt with all people cause that's just how I am. If I have to read morse code to know whether a guy is interested I've moved on. And if I call a guy and he doesn't call me back - forget him. I mean when I call Jesus he answers me and you tell me your busier than Jesus?