She’s just not that into you…

[archerships]

(Original photo)

In my experience, a woman knows whether she’s into you within the first few minutes of meeting. (And sometimes, even before she’s met you in person.) In all of my successful attempts to start a relationship, my girlfriends have been enthusiastic about me from the very first date. (Even if they were in relationships at the time we first met.)

Of course, initial failure doesn’t stop guys from trying. Few women are direct enough to explicitly reject a guy, so they indicate lack of interest in subtle and not so subtle ways. Unfortunately, some guys are too oblivious or stubborn to take the hint.

*cough*

Since failed wooing attempts are painful for the guy, and annoying for the girl, here’s a list of ways to know that she’s just not that into you…

1. At parties, she looks past you to other guys at the party.

2. She answers questions in monosyllables.

3. She doesn’t remember your name.

4. She returns phone calls erratically, if at all.

5. You have a blog, and she doesn’t read it.

6. She doesn’t acknowledge gifts or cards.

7. She doesn’t smile enthusiastically when she sees you.

8. She doesn’t ask you about your life.

9. She never has time to meet you for lunch or dinner.

10. She doesn’t respect your time — she’s often late, or stands you up altogether.

11. If you propose a date, and she has a schedule conflict, she doesn’t suggest another date.

12. On the first date, she unexpectedly brings another guy friend along with her.

13. She doesn’t laugh at your jokes, and she doesn’t crack her own jokes with you. (Assuming you’ve seen that she has a sense of humor in other contexts.)

14. She has no patience when you make mistake (e.g. if you take a wrong turn while driving to the restaurant). She acts irritated when she’s around you.

15. She cancels a dinner date one hour before you’re supposed to meet, because some another guy invited her to go to the theater.

16. She doesn’t lean in close while you’re talking.

17. She doesn’t try to touch you, and/or flinches when you touch her.

18. She talks about wanting to be your “friend”.

19. She talks about her other boyfriend(s) with no prompting from you.

20. She will agree to do things with you, but only if another of her friends comes along.

21. She doesn’t try to sit by you, and moves away if you sit by her.

22. She ends conversations with you quickly, and makes no attempt to draw you out.

So there you go. If a potential love interest exhibits any of the behaviors above, she’s telling you, “No, I’m not interested in you.” Your best bet is to stop wasting time with her, and spend time trying to find someone who is enthusiastic about you.

I imagine most of the same behaviors hold true for guys as well.

Has anyone else had success at changing the mind of someone who was initially not interested in you? You see it in movies a lot, but I’ve never seen it happen in real life.

Original: craschworks - comments

Comments

[gentlemaitresse.livejournal.com]

10. Unless she's extremely busy and so is often late, in general. Then it has nothing at all to do with you.

13. She might not have a sense of humor. In which case, why would you be interested in her, anyway?

18. I always want to be friends, but that doesn't necessarily mean I don't want to be more!

[crasch.livejournal.com]

10. Maybe if it happens once or twice. But if a woman is chronically late, she doesn't respect your time. People are on time for the things that are important to them.

13. True. I added the caveat that she's exhibited a sense of humor elsewhere.

18. In my experience, it's true women want to be friends first, but they don't start talking about being "friends" until they've dismissed you as a lover.

[istar.livejournal.com]

I don't generally want to spend time trying to change the mind of someone who's not interested in me. If they change their mind on their own, I'm here... maybe.

Speaking of relationships, did you see the rebuttal to the "beauty as a depreciating asset" post? Clearly not the original writer, but I LOL'd anyway!

[crasch.livejournal.com]

I don't generally want to spend time trying to change the mind of someone who's not interested in me.

I agree, in principle. However, sometimes one's ego/lust causes you to persist longer than optimal.

Speaking of relationships, did you see the rebuttal to the "beauty as a depreciating asset" post?

Thanks for the link!

response of a friend:

[integreillumine.livejournal.com]

For sporting sake:
-She is confusing risky discount factors with physical aging/depreciation. A woman's beauty still depreciates. That this is a certainty does bolster the discount factors, but depreciation is still (by her argument) a certainty.
-Plastic surgery helps, but aging is still aging.
-She is correct that markets are indeed inefficient, especially dating markets.
-She is correct that a Wall Streeter's future income needs to be discounted due to risk, more heavily discounted than other professions.
-More likely than not, the Wall Streeter was probably on the younger side, late 20s to mid 30s. They tend to get married as they get older. His hairline is probably still fine.
-Her point about junk bond payments reinforces his point: the moment he stops making the money one year, she leaves. So marriage is a crappy deal.
-A husband isn't really a junk bond. He's more like a stock. Suppose he makes over a million in one year, and gets fired the next year. While very volatile, it averages out to more than half a million annualized over two years, and if they divorce, courts to take into consider both his
income (or lack) as well as net worth. Thus, the investment is much more like an equity stake than a bond investment.
-She is wrong about the "nested underwater call options" (because she doesn't know what a call option is???). She doesn't need nested call options on his future payments -- they are HERS by right of ownership of the bond.
-She means a put on the bond. A put is the option to sell if her husband depreciates too much. The fact this option is underwater is a *good* thing; it means he is value above strike.
-If he is NOT a bond, then what she actually has is an equity stake in his future variable payments.
-If she still doesn't frame it as an equity investment, what she wants is a series of PUTS on his annual income, a put each consecutive year, struck at half a million. If at any year, he makes less, she "puts" him back to the market and receives her half million.

Anyway, this "rebuttal" clutters up the discussion. As you know about me, I don't like too much intellectual overclutter, because the brain is preoccupied with details and the real gist is obscured.

Her "boyfriend trader" didn't help her enough. :P

once bitten, twice shy

[integreillumine.livejournal.com]

There is the matter of some women (or men, for that matter) being slower to warm/fully trust before they'll engage in a relationship, especially if they're not just looking for the proverbial hay-roll. This is even though people become more comfortable with flirting, communication, sex generally as they get older.

There is usually at least some mutual connection from outset, though.

Re: once bitten, twice shy

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Yes, I think that it might take a woman a number of dates before she would feel comfortable enough to engage in a sexual relationship. But I don't think she would exhibit any of the above behaviors if she had expectations of the relationship developing further.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Well, I associate the word "bitch" with a woman who is intentionally cruel. I don't think most of the women I've observed were intentionally cruel. Rather, in most cases, I think that they didn't want to hurt the guy's ego by being blunt, so they acted that way in the hopes that he would get the signal without them having to spell it out for him directly.

[nelliebelle.livejournal.com]

lol i was going to say this. she needs to be more like me.

[gentlemaitresse.livejournal.com]

Most people don't expect you to be direct, and are confused when you are.

Or at least that's been my experience.

[frogpyjamas.livejournal.com]

It's been my experience that dating is more an art than a science. You could try to predict or read with a list of rules or tell tale signs like this, but, really, it's very clear when there is chemistry. To me, making a science out of dating takes out the mystery and enjoyability.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

it's very clear when there is chemistry.


I agree. But sometimes there's lust on one side and not the other. And the one with lust often hopes to inspire lust in the other.

[olegvolk.livejournal.com]

It can be hard to figure out when the sole mode of communication is by IM. No inflection or facial expressions to guide you.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Agreed. I especially hate long pauses. Are they not interested? Are they eating a sandwich? Is their connection down?

That's why I try to meet in person fairly early on.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Words of wisdom.

[mauitian.livejournal.com]

23) Restraining order.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Heh. Yes, well, that is the gold standard indicator of disinterest.

[smjayman.livejournal.com]

Has anyone else had success at changing the mind of someone who was initially not interested in you?

Exactly one time. I went from being nice to being a 100% dick, and within 48 hours she was pitching herself at me.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Fascinating. What motivated you to change? What did you do or say that made you a "100% dick"?

[almond-tiger.livejournal.com]

Yup.

[madbard.livejournal.com]

>Has anyone else had success at changing the mind of someone who was initially not interested in you?

It can be done. I make a lousy first impression. Second impression tends to be bad too. But around the eighth or ninth impression, some women come around.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Interesting. Given your wit, I would've guessed that making a good first impression would not be particularly difficult for you.

What do you think they miss at first, that later causes them to change their mind?

[evelynne.livejournal.com]

I'm one of those freakish people who can't tell if she's attracted to someone until I've gotten to know them. I'm baffled by women who know if they're interested right away. If I feel sparks right away, it usually wears off. Someone I like very much that I didn't feel sparks with initially will suddenly turn my knees to jelly weeks later. It has happened to me repeatedly and I still haven't figured out what causes the change from no-sparks to sparks. I don't trust my judgment at all. I would have to go on four or five dates at least before I'd be able to tell a guy "This isn't happening," which is part of why I prefer to get to know people in group settings, not on dates, anyway. There must be something I find sexually attractive in men that is not immediately visible to me. I know that looks have little to do with it -- Poindexter is a pretty boy, but a lot of guys I've been attracted to are not. Sparks to no-sparks is more obvious -- it's usually explained by the revealing of personality traits or values I don't care for.

I am one of those freaks too!

[(Anonymous)]

I am SO with you on this one. I almost never am attracted to a guy right away. But when I get to know a decent looking guy and get comfy with him, then if I am attracted to him, I will feel *sparks* for him. Maybe you are on to something in saying that we could be attracted to those things that are not visible and not obvious, things that are not usually seen "at first sight". I do not know how to verbalize those wonderful sexy things but when they are there....WHOA!

[radiantsun.livejournal.com]

# 20 by itself (with other indicators of interes) look like trying to be safe to me, i.e. getting to know someone in a group first vs isoalting yoruself with them.

#5 could be she isn't that geektastic. Also, I did go out with a guy once who read an entire 3 years worth of my blog before we went out, he remembered more about my life than I did . . . if he were someone else that could have been creepy.

#15 is a definitive sign


#2 could mean she's an idiot

Overall I think it is a good list and a good companion to He's Just Not That Into You! I think if people read these books and then did the opposite to the peopel they were interested in, it woudl send a clearer message.

On the lateness thing-- she may not respect her own time either, in which case it isn't personal against you. Although I am rarely late for first - third dates. (I am frequently late for work . . . if I want to be on time I have to aim for a 1/2 hour early . . . :( )

[radiantsun.livejournal.com]

I also pointed your post to a friend whose been studying the pick up artist community rather in depth for the last two years, he says (bold mine):

K: read the blog
very generalized ideas
10:10 AM me: yeah i know
10:11 AM anyway I thought some of the discussions were interesting like how the women were pointing out certain thigns weren't necessarily signs
K: well... b/c what he talks about are symptoms
not intent
any action is not necessarily a sign.. b/c you have to read the intent ... not the actual action
some people are late.. b/c they are always late
some people dont tell jokes
10:12 AM b/c they don't have any
some people don't touch.. b/c they are shy...
even they they really want to
me: So you want to make a comment, or shall I?
10:13 AM K: go ahead
making time.. is also about the timing in your life
so yes.. she may not like you right then and there.. so you aren't a priority.. but that doesn mean she's not attracted to you
10:14 AM it's that you haven't shown enough value yet to be on her priority list
some girls are not ALWAYS after pursuing a guy
some girls do know that even though they'd like one.. they have their mind in something else first
first date.. when she brings along a friend... it's actually not a bad thing
10:15 AM that means she probably likes you but aren't sure about you
or... she's not confident in herself so needs the reinforcement of her friends
so it all depends on intent
10:16 AM she talks about wantin to be your friend.. again.. that depends. wanting to be your friend could mean.. long term relationship potential
depends on how that's brought up
there's SOOOOO many things
--------------

The only issue I have with intent is when it becomes accidentally on purpose kind of stuff. There's a reason the phrase "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" . . . however, when it comes to getting to know someone i think my friend's point clarifies things a lot more. He says " I only "judge" the action based on the intent I perceive in he person ihtey are chronically a certain way and can't change I know how to handle it.. by lowering my expectations but it still has nothing to do with the idea of... "she's not that into you"

me: hm mokay
what if you can't accurately judge her intentions
Ie you ascribe bad ones to her
K: you focus on someone else ;p
remember the simple formula of rewarding good behavior and ignoring/punishing bad ones
that apply to your own life
ifyou can't figure something out
me: ok
K: let it be... focus on the stuff you can focus on
me: ah the serentiy prayer again

Good Stuff

[(Anonymous)]

A friend asked me to read...dating is my business and she thought i would like what you had to say.


Good stuff!!!! And all very true.

David Wygant

[hiro-antagonist.livejournal.com]

50% of it is chemistry between people - if it doesn't sync, it's just not going to work out in the end. There's zero point in trying to change the nature of another person - there's a greater chance that the sun will start to rise in the west. Accept your losses and move on, there's always more fish in the sea.

[psychomagnet.livejournal.com]

Do you know how much of myself I saw in those? Not because I wanted to be the too subtle and confusing woman, but because I thought I'd made my desires (or lack thereof) clear, but the not-so-much-of-a-gentleman didn't seem to take me seriously. I always feel like I need to put up a wall when simply stating "I enjoy hanging out with you, but I'm not attracted to you in a way to pursue a romantic relationship" isn't accepted at face value. It's like that statement somehow gets translated by the guy's mind to "She's still hanging out with me so I still have a chance to get into her pants". Disappointing.

So just how direct would I need to be? I find guys I like hanging out with, not wanting to date, but it seems like they never leave it at just that so we both can enjoy the friendship. I'd hate to think the only guys I can relax and hang out with are those who I'm officially attracted to and dating.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

I think stating "I enjoy hanging out with you, but I'm not attracted to you in a way to pursue a romantic relationship." is direct enough. If he continues to pursue a romantic relationship, then you probably need to cut him off entirely, unfortunately.

From the perspective of a guy who has been in that position, I can tell you it's very hard to be "just friends" with someone to whom you're strongly attracted. When you're together, you're constantly reminded of her charms. Every flash of leg, every whiff of perfume, every accidental brush of the hand is fuel for the flame you feel burning inside. Your mind plays out unwelcome, unbidden fantasies.

Logically, yes, you realize that your particular package of traits will not appeal to every woman, just as many women don't appeal to you. But you think "Oh, she must like something about me, or else she wouldn't hang out with me at all. Maybe if I hang out with her long enough, she will eventually recognize my value, and will want me in return."

So the urge to try again becomes very strong.

These feelings can be particularly strong if the guy isn't doing a lot of dating otherwise. So you may want to put such relationships on the back burner until the guy has a new girlfriend. Once he has a girlfriend to ease the pangs of loneliness and lust, he may be able to be just a friend again.

( Note that I'm not excusing men who are too persistent, just trying to explain why they may be behaving that way. )