A player scheduled a date with a chick, then felt ill so he cancelled, then felt better and attempted to un-cancel (or reschedule, I guess) the date. The chick said she’s not free anymore and that she thinks he had other plans, and the other plans got cancelled. She “doesn’t believe in miracles.” Sounds like a girl who’s been around men and dating for a while.
So what would you do? Leave answers in the comments before you read on.
Okay, so what should you do? Red Pill Dad said, “That’s tough. My first thought is to make fun of her.” He also said, “Or, the other thing would be to just say: I’m sorry you feel that way—I’d still like to see you. Let’s meet at X at 7.” The player in question thinks she’s legit angry, though. He wants to reply, because “she’s essentially calling me a liar.”
I had a different take, “I’d ignore, roll off, try again next week.” Why? Attention points to the issue, and leads to “the question of the guy’s veracity” being the frame… which is not the frame you want, especially over text (if you haven’t read the essay on attention, go read it, as it’s foundational and fundamental). The issue of the player’s veracity is already lost: if he sees her in person again he can reiterate the truth, but she doesn’t believe him, and it’s unlikely that anything he can say over text will change her mind.
Even a token response seems sub-optimal to me. I’d say nothing, and doing nothing is an under-rated move. Notice how often chicks do it. And then when we (men) re-engage later, chicks act as if nothing has happened or changed. Many of us, myself included, have an often-counterproductive desire to have the last word, or to achieve closure in the conversation. We want to be right, or “right.” Chicks, however, are often willing to say nothing, and let absence speak: it can be a kind of power move, if done properly. Often, the best way to deal with the argument or disagreement is to change the frame, to not have that argument, and instead to have another. Attention to an issue foregrounds the issue. At first glance, maybe it seems as if the player’s options were fight her (weak frame) or grovel to her (also weak frame). Ignoring her, letting emotions calm down, feels like short circuiting the system.
When people argue, they are very rarely arguing about what is “right.” They are talking about their ego, their underlying big five personality traits, their social status, etc. How can we intelligently manage conflict? When a guy gets into this kind of ticky-tacky debate with a chick, he’s often lost the moment he engages. Think of nerds who engage chicks in political or social debates, that sort of thing…. they very effectively turn the chick off. Many men are overly logical with chicks, thinking that the situation is like a math problem, with a right answer. But chicks are not math problems, they are feeling/emotions problems, where logic as men know it often doesn’t apply. Many men are scientists and engineers while many chicks are social workers and HR people, telling us an important truth about chick preferences and man preferences.
The girl I call Cassie was prone to annoying feminist/SJW outbursts via text, and when she did… I ignored them and re-engaged later, when I was ready to see her. Those outbursts were annoying but overall I liked f**king her, she reliably went to sex clubs with me, and they were an annoyance but little more. I’d starve her attempt to make a fire of oxygen by not engaging, but I simultaneously didn’t agree with her feminist bullshit. That seemed like a decent middle ground to me. She’d sometimes do the same in conversation, which I also ignored, and directed the conversation to better places. I’d never have her be my girlfriend or a significant presence in my life, because she’s shown me who she is (annoying), but she is good for sex clubs and that is enough for her. She’s also said she wants to be in a relationship, not just someone’s secondary partner, but she can’t connect her off-putting feminist SJW outbursts from her lack of significant male companionship. Girls like her are not so common, but they can be found, especially in the big cities, or wherever spinsters and future spinsters gather.
Maybe the player’s desire to respond comes from scarcity mindset, and he felt the urge to get her back on board, to “fix” things… whereas that would drive her further away. Better to let her feelings change.
These strategies don’t always work and following them is no guarantee of victory (there are no guarantees in life apart from death, and that MDMA is awesome). The player with the dilemma shouldn’t have cancelled until he was sure he’d be sick. If he could have, he should have done a video call so she can hear/see he’s sick. We all make mistakes, however, and I have probably made more mistakes than most: we can only try to learn from those mistakes. If I hadn’t begun reading player blogs ten or twelve years ago there are many subtle lessons I’d not have learned.
The player should also go talk to more chicks (the answer to many dilemmas), as this one might be done with him. She might not be, you never know, but “talk to new girls” is almost always good advice.
An epilogue: between the time I wrote the above and published it, the player ignored the girl, and she double-texted him, with a positive second message. Ultimately she seems to have flaked, but I think the player learned from this situation. He wrote to me that he’d still like,
clarification on the interplay of strong frame and ignoring her behavior. Text admittedly makes things difficult here. But as much as you don’t want to reward bad behavior with attention, it would make sense to establish firm boundaries and expectations of behavior.
There is no perfect answer here. I see a lot of sub-optimal advice online telling guys to cut out a girl at the first time of “disrespect.” This is ridiculous for most guys, as girls naturally shit test and more simply want to see what a guy is made of… or just banter. Girls love teasing, something many online autists struggle with.
Girls also feel different things at different times. If a guy does not have almost all the women in his life he can handle, he should not be prematurely ejecting girls for being girls. A lot of the advice I see in the community is about the guy flaunting his ego and also trying to protect his ego. Go ahead and do ego projection and protection if it makes you feel good, but I’d rather make connections with chicks and get laid.
I am worried that “it would make sense to establish firm boundaries and expectations of behavior” is too much an ultimatum, and ultimatums are either a sign of weakness (most commonly) or a sign of great strength (very rarely). When a guy withdraws attention for poor behavior, that is enough: it is enough to do the thing, without announcing like a woman that the thing will be done. Much of this perceived desire to punish is about the man’s fear that he is weak, or that he somehow wishes to take revenge on all women, or to control all women.
See as well Red Pill Dad’s post, “Call a woman on her shit or put her in her place. If she’s your wife or girlfriend, OK, but even then you need to be careful, because directly confronting a woman, especially if she’s agitated or angry is falling into her frame. The best thing to do is ignore her, change the subject, or dismiss it without being combative.” Most people don’t change their minds and indeed stop listening altogether when someone confronts them head on. We most want to hear someone who already has status and/or credibility.