
Why ‘playing hard to get’ may actually work - hhs
https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter/why-playing-hard-to-get-may-work-435602/
======
ChuckNorris89
_May_ work?!

It definitely does, no questions about that, but only as long has you have a
high enough perceived value from the other party. A hobo playing hard to get
won't win anything from it. You have to display some sort of value, be it real
or faked.

To put it simple, if you chase something (job, love interest, etc.) it means
you really need that something, if you need it, it means you have no other
options, if you have no other options it makes you desperate and being
desperate signals low value. If nobody else wants you, why should I?

Think of it like ivy league or a night club. Everyone wants to get into the
ones that are the most difficult to get into whereas almost nobody wants to go
to the ones anyone can just walk into. That's why girls will flake on you if
you're always too available for dates while they're trying to go out with that
guy who keeps ignoring their texts.

It's basic human evolution from our tribal days to desire what's scarce and
discard what's not.

~~~
twic
If you play hard to get, aren't you selecting for the most desperate suitors?
And therefore the ones of the lowest "value" themselves?

~~~
jcbrand
You could use "determined" instead of "desperate" and then suddenly it sounds
like a value proposition again.

~~~
scotty79
I'm not sure. Determination is not automatically positive quality.

~~~
m4r35n357
. . . and probably cannot be sustained indefinitely.

------
Traubenfuchs
As I shredded off the last bits of my "childhood" / "youth" / "young person
vibes" in the last years I realized that dating is just as horrible as the
rest of life.

Everyone just runs around with a fuzzy version of the dating calculator* in
their head. Is that person good enough? What's my chance to find someone
better? Is it worth sacrificing the energy I spent on my current partner for
the chance of finding a better one? I see "settled" and unhappy people all
around. Those who have "reproduce" as next point on their bullet list for
life.

In gay dating it's even worse, because there are usually no wombs with their
"best before" date involved and social pressure to settle is lower.

* [https://www.omnicalculator.com/other/dating-theory](https://www.omnicalculator.com/other/dating-theory)

~~~
loopz
Maybe try meeting someone who is not "everyone", and also make sure you don't
fall into the same trap yourself? If you meet a person you settle down with,
it doesn't stop attraction to other people, but you have a choice to limit
that expression to managable levels, or live with the hell of not doing that.

------
dvh
If you want to hear what everybody knows, ask behavioral psychologist.

------
rdiddly
_Get shot down cuz you 're over-zealous / Play hard-to-get, females get
jealous_ -Young MC, 1988 or so

In all seriousness, if this is a strategy to make yourself look better than
you are, shouldn't prospective partners ask why you need to do that? Doesn't
your playing hard-to-get imply that _you 're_ the desperate one, on some
level? Or rather it's the "I drive a Dodge Stratus" of dating. It
separates/differentiates you from the lowest tier, but I think those who are
truly in the top tier will probably use some kind of counter-signaling
approach.

Welcome to the wonderful world of over-thinking it and trying to game the
system.

~~~
Traubenfuchs
There is a difference between "playing hard to get" and "BEING hard to get"...

------
guildwriter
Based on what I've seen in online dating in my own experiences and the
experiences of others, this is not an effective strategy. In fact I'd say it's
a counterproductive strategy. Timing and options are large contributing
factors to this.

The largest problem with online dating is that there are no natural filters in
place. Dating in meatspace means that oftentimes you mean people in contexts
that help pre-screen them and give you an idea what you are dealing with
(mutual friends, work, gym, hobby, etc.) Online dating strips that away and
forces you to have to evaluate each person in person in order to have any clue
if things may actually work out in a relationship. In this case, the important
thing is to drive things to the first date and then take it from there.

(Technically I guess this is easier if all you're looking for is sex)

With a large pool of options it means that the entire game of "waiting for a
couple of days to signal non-desperation" is a counter productive strategy.
People constantly have potential people to meet. If you take too long to
respond, it will signal disinterest or that you are ghosting them, and they
will simply move on.

Note that none of this means "always make yourself available at all times".
That will reek of desperation.

------
troughway
Texts like The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature by Matt Ridley
are eye openers in this genre.

------
jpeg_hero
> “Playing hard to get makes it seem as if you are more in demand—we call that
> having higher mate value,” says Harry Reis, a professor of psychology and
> Dean’s Professor in Arts, Sciences & Engineering at Rochester.

>“People who are too easy to attract may be perceived as more desperate,” says
coauthor Gurit Birnbaum, a social psychologist and associate professor of
psychology at the IDC Herzliya.

Thank god for theses scientists undertaking this examination of this curious
ritual called “human love”

------
metalliqaz
That headline makes me laugh. "may" work? Obviously it works, that's why women
have been playing that game since the dawn of civilization.

~~~
chooseaname
When a lady cardinal is being wooed by a couple of bright red guy cardinals
and she eventually chooses one, we call that nature. When humans do this, we
get our feathers ruffled. Strange.

~~~
logicprog
Because humans have a choice in it. Women can choose _not_ to do it, the
female cardinal can't, it's just an indelible part of their mating ritual and
instincts. Ought implies can - there's no reason to be angry at someone for
something if they can't help it.

In addition, female cardinals do that ritual because it's a way of filtering
for mates without conscious/rational assessment and communication... something
which human women are entirely capable of, so they don't need wacky
evolutionary tricks to do it.

But also, the GP doesn't seem to have his feathers ruffled anyway, so it looks
like you're just searching for some offense here.

~~~
chooseaname
> Because humans have a choice in it.

This is the assumption. (Most)Women nest when a child is on the way. That's an
involuntary behavior. Why can't there be some involuntary behavior associated
with choosing a mate?

And I'm not searching for some offense. I keyed off the OP saying "Game", but
I don't feel they particularly had _their_ feathers ruffled.

~~~
logicprog
Right, there are indeed involuntary behaviors. But I think there are plenty of
examples of women that choose _not_ to play hard-to-get - if it was
involuntary we would have no, or vanishingly few, examples. If "voluntary"
means anything - and I'm not talking about free will vs determinism here -
this is one of those behaviors that is indeed voluntary.

