The Softboi

It took me a while to recognize the sparring phase of rejecting a date, for me.  Sparring was actually a phase of rejection and not a point of attraction for me (although it was for the men).  For me, sparring has no appeal and is just a sort of challenge offered after I have been turned off (typically by some sort of over-reaching by him, like I mentioned the overt sexuality (disrespectful in early days,  inappropriate unless thats our stated intent, duh) , or too much intensity and assumptions made about me, etc.  For me it's the phase of dating in which I'm saying "Catch if can, nope, you can't." And, typically this sparring will up his ante and before you know it he's come right out and assumed it's ok to objectify me or whatever the original yuk factor is.  It's me assessing what it is I thought I saw, and pulling back.

I get that for others it's a part of attraction, but still I think that intensity of ANY kind should be checked.  Take small bites so you don't choke, is what I'm saying.  Don't jump into ANY kind of connection- don't get too immersed in what you "love" - see it but don't put yourself all there.  Hold it all at arms length so you can see other facets. I'm not saying be scared- but be balanced in what you spend time on, getting to know someone. Just my advice, take it or leave it. 

This thread is just so heartbreaking. If this is the prominent train of thought, then all hope has just gone out of the dating world for me, as a bloke. I see the exact sort of person talked about in my ex-best mate.

I know two women that would tell you I was this, when I made a decision that after seeing where they were in life, and sussing out their attachment style, that we weren’t suitable. I know I broke both of their hearts, which is just bloody terrible. For the first time in my life I had dealbreakers, and I wasn’t going to get myself into something that was harder and more hurtful to get out of later. I can see how they could arrive at that conclusion, too!

I just want to say that we have all extremities of the spectrum here. Here because we bummed out somewhere along the line and needed answers.

I'm sorry, I don't understand. Can't you just keep dating as you are? What do you mean you see the same person as your ex mate- do you mean in the men we have described? I don't think anyone is going after anything except the behavior of using intellectual banter as a wall- either to block someone out or challenge them to scale it. It can be gamey but is not always, and that depends upon emotional availability it seems.

mrob, I don't think this thread's takeaway is never spar and stay walled. It's, folks are different and some prefer to banter and some don't, but that doing it can hold a telltale sign of emotional unavailability. And to gauge on both sides if that's happening to assist in assessing compatibility and protecting yourself from someone who is going to be unavailable manifesting as selfish and not fully committed.

This is the same as pretty much anything because emotional unavailability bleeds into so much. Though we're also discussing a specific set of traits and examples that may indicate when the intellectual sparring is out of dark traits instead of fun and healthy communication.

@shiningstar I meant to address the mind game concept more thoroughly, and then forgot. 

I think there is a total misconception about DA playing mind games if they don't reply to a text, either soon enough or not at all.  I don't know if there is a conscious awareness with FA around all that, I know for sure there is a conscious awareness for a narcissist, and I know also that I have read that delaying replies can be an AP protest behavior.

My take on that- consider the fact that DA are most regulated in isolation; and we even can feel closer and more aligned with a partner in absence.  If a DA is not in contact it is not necessarily an act of conscious rejection or gaminess even though it may feel like it.  It can be a feeling ok, or feeling most at ease with a distance, and it can just be a not-deliberate failure to connect.  Look at it this way- if an ap feels best in connection, they are not going look for ways to fuck that up by pushing someone away or by giving space.  They are going to want to naturally maintain that connection.
Opposite is true with DA.  If they feel connected at a viscerally comfortable level in absence (yes this can be true, Think if the "same house different room " idea) they are not going to automatically and naturally do a behavior that will fuck that up for them.  
People seem to think that it's deliberate mind games or punishment or something.  I haven't experienced that as a fundamental DA trait, in myself or other DA I know.
Its an unawareness.  It can be a forgetfulness.  A comfort zone, and an unconscious need to have a gap.

I don't expect that to change the perception and feelings around it for anyone.  I myself need my bids met, by my partner.  That is what makes a relationship work actually- meeting each other's bids.  When I felt negative feelings about not being met, and thought my partner might have intentionally been sending me a message, he felt sad and inadequate and some anxiety about his own limitations.  And then of course it sinks in to me- I'm not deliberately hurting or manipulating anyone with my intentions or limitations either.

And; for the record, I have not had trouble committing with men who pursued that, and it was with good intentions but for practical and reasonable reasons (lacking real attachment).  They are the ones that had anxious styles and it turns out that they were attached and not loving.  So it was two sides of the unavailable coin.

Otherwise, in dating scenarios I have never made it past a very short time of involvement before I exited, there is no way to get to the commitment talk.  I have committed in the only long term relationships I've been in.  Getting to that point is the impossibility, for me. Very hard to get either to a first date, and if so, to the second.  This thread I thought mainly dealt with the early dating "getting to know you" phase.  I wanted to address the mind games from that perspective.  No talk of commitment at all at that phase, and rather than delay a text intentionally I would tend to just say "I'm not interested in continuing contact but I wish you the best." First I have to be sure that's my decision (which as a DA doesn't take long.). I'm not saying that is great or good but that's my answer to the question you asked me in this post. 

I think you're right in that what you consider normal mental sparring can become war games. What you think is playful, bonding interactions can be used for entertainment value and/or a challenge to be conquered, which is not desirable of course. The only thing I'll say is that given that this is probably our default as academics, a most important thing is really to not initiate these things on your own accord and present that as your key value first and foremost; it's not giving up on playful interactions or questioning everyone who is playful, it's using your wit and intelligence smartly to filter out those who aren't really on your level but wants to be so spars with you as a game. 

I think there is certainly a "profile" but levels of empathy vary, levels of particular styles vary, and MANY times the outside interpretation is mistaken, in terms of objective or intent.  Often the interpretation between styles is defensive and accusatory, implying ill intent or a something that isn't there.

This thread began by referencing a personality type that tends toward narcissistic (low empathy) traits.  In that case we aren't talking attachment style we are talking personality type that can be manipulative with intent.  Some people really do exploit emotions or bodies to get what they want, with little regard for the person they are engaged with.  That's headed in the direction of PD not just attachment style.