[rtl49]

I've read a few comments deriding the complexity of this analysis. However, I think it is worth identifying it as a fact that, noticed or not, there is something of a power struggle in the early stages of the human courtship ritual.

Here, this issue is that of availability. Given that it is sometimes difficult to gauge the desirability of a prospective partner, one metric is how eager they seem to be. If the other replies quickly, this is an indication that they are quite eager, which suggests that they have few encounters, and that therefore few have evaluated this person as attractive. On the contrary, a bit of a lapse before a response suggests that the other feels a bit of indifference toward you, and that therefore the person is likely to have more encounters, and therefore is considered more attractive.

You can be forgiven for wishing for more simplicity, given that relationships in most media are depicted rather one-dimensionally, as the result of unambiguous and mutual attraction. This is not how it tends to work in the real world.

[stuxnet79]

I used to respond immediately because I'm not a fan of playing games but now I never do, mostly because nobody else does it either. But that is only when I text. I NEVER text these days. I'd rather call. I'm impatient and I'd rather have a short quick conversation than one uncomfortable one that stretches over days.

You can easily spot the fakers from the ones who are actually unavailable though. My ex before we broke up used to take days and days to respond but she was unemployed and had nothing going in her life, whereas I had super busy professors in big labs who for some reason respected my time enough to get back to me within 24 hours or 48 hours at most.

[philh]

> My ex before we broke up used to take days and days to respond but she was unemployed and had nothing going in her life

Not to speak of your ex specifically. But this could just be a case of "shitty at replying to texts", which I also have (in relation to my mother and some of my friends, but not to other friends or my girlfriend). It's not necessarily about being a faker.

[stuxnet79]

Not really, depending on what type of text it was she'd reply instantaneously. Also, honestly in this day and age is it really appropriate to take at minimum 4 days to respond to a question from your "significant other"? That is not normal. Everyone is always on their phone, like she was. In any case, regardless of whether she was faking it or not, it's difficult to maintain a relationship with someone who is always either unavailable or unreliable. Eventually I start to mimic their stiffness despite how well intentioned I may be and how petty I may think my actions are.

[Jtsummers]

> Also, honestly in this day and age is it really appropriate to take at minimum 4 days to respond to a question from your "significant other"? That is not normal. [emphasis added]

This is the real problem. Once you're dating someone (that is, it's past the courtship part and you've acknowledged the relationship), if you can't check your communication devices at least once or twice a day for messages from them (excluding hectic work/life schedules), there's a problem. You're continuing the game from courtship, you don't respect them, or you aren't actually into the relationship.

EDIT: Added 'once or '. I realize this is a YMMV moment, but even if you don't carry your phone during the day (like me), you can check it when you wake up and before bed. And if you're interested/invested in someone, you've got to make more time than that or there's never an actual conversation.

[cableshaft]

I once dated a girl who had two jobs and a kid. I frequently wouldn't get responses back for days. I tried to keep it going, but it fell apart after four months of one date every two or three weeks. In retrospect, I'm glad it did end, even though I was super into her.

[FilterSweep]

It is in fact an expression of power, for one.

However, for two, it is a general discontent in the options available. You are the "next best choice" or the "best available" when facing this lack of eagerness in early relationship phases. There is an element of ego preservation in this behavior. One can improve from "best available," but this comes with experience in the early phase of the relationship.

[tajen]

OMG this is stressing me out so much. I coped with the dating game by dating men and becoming allergic to women's unreasonable expectations [1]. I was reasonably cute ("9.5/10" according to girls at uni), liked sports and programmer job, but I'm ending up unsatisfied in life. Part of it is not encountering enough girls, the other part is not knowing what to do to meet more, third part was succeeding to improve things but then being dumped abroad while still in culture shock in a not-nice-at-all break-up. Part 4 is, not recovering from that break-up, trust issues with girls, and we're 10 years later, still a wreak, while virtually quite rich from my stock options, and startup founder.

I used to go out of my way to be generous, give back to the society and be nice to people. I don't know why, I secretely hoped to get support in case of a major event. But no-one counted/counts that break-up as relevant, and the social fabric wasn't here to hug me when I needed it. Now I vote for individualism and I'm in life for money. I'm voting so far-right, I feel like Hitler.

Life isn't nice for losers, and I've lost the game. Starting as a programmer doesn't help. In 2006 when it was a mostly-male environment. Through 2012 when only women were promoted around me. Didn't help.

Has anyone here been so low? Given up so much of their values because of insatisfaction? but succeeded to improve his character later in life? Needless to say, I don't like who I am now.

[1] To be clear, I still believe in equality and I'm the (only) one trying to bring Lego and science to my goddaughter.