On playing vs being

I’d appreciate it if you could elaborate on your perspective on playing/being hard to get.

To quote you, you say that playing hard to get works on boys, being hard to get works on men, but you always draw a distinction between being hard to get and impossible to get.

1) What practical difference is there between consciously holding back to stoke interest in a lover, and unconsciously holding back if they both serve the same ends?

2) Is playing/being hard to get even a legitimate tactic in romantic relationships? Isn’t appealing to someone’s desire for what they can’t have just a matter of ego rather than a substantial bond between two people built on mutual affinity?

3) you can’t be naturally hard to get AND consciously making sure you’re not too hard to get. You’ve contradicted yourself.


Everything about your question — all of it — falls squarely into the category of playing hard to get. You have yet to even grasp the concept of being hard to get.

Being hard to get isn’t a tactic. It has nothing to do with conscious or unconscious action. It just fucking is.

Stop thinking about it. Let it go. I know you want me to elaborate on the distinction, but until you start getting zen about this shit, it’s only going to frustrate you.

(Sometimes I wish I could end these things with the sound of a gong.)


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *