Trying 'The Rules' with OD. Anyone else attempted this?

[akaWisey]

That's what I've decided to do. Joined POF last week, bought the Rules of Internet Dating and hoping for something better than I've had thus far?.

Not sure how well this method translates however??.the last thing I want is marriage and the principle's all seem geared up to 'snare' a bloke into proposing.

Having said that, I can see all the mistakes I've made in the past with online dating and I've been able to rectify them.

Anyone else tried to do it differently and not felt you've sacrificed your own principles?

To be honest, if when I was internet dating if I found out that a women was using some book as a template/refernce point as to how she conducts herself while dating I would run a mile.

I'll ask you fans my big question about The Rules, then

They're only going to work on entitled chaps who treat dating as a kind of game hunt, surely? What if you'd prefer a man who's emotionally honest; wouldn't he be put off by manipulative/withholding tactics?

I understand how 'rules' can provide a useful substitute for boundaries, if yours are messy, but The Rules has always struck me as a good way to perpetuate dysfunctional relationships ...

Have any Rules fans read Women Who Love Too Much? Do you think that rejecting co-dependent behaviours would achieve similar results, more honestly?

garlic, the Rules only screens out men who are not that into you or who are only after an easy shag.

It does not screen out players/sociopaths/narcissists, EAs who are after the thrill of the case. In all cases, Rules or no Rules, women still have to keep their red flag indicators on.

Passing the Rules test is only a baseline hurdle and more relevant for the initial stages of dating. Going forward, women still need to continue to due their due diligence.

@ garlicagain

"The Rules has always struck me as a good way to perpetuate dysfunctional relationships ... "

My thoughts too.

I met Mrs CuChullain through online dating and I found it refreshing that did not follow some daft 'rule book', she was just her bright sparkly self and her attitude was 'this is me, take it or leave it'. She made the first move sending me an email (something many women seem to think is wrong), I liked her profile and dropper her a line back, over the next few days we swapped a few more emails then got chatting on msn messenger before finally swapping mobile numbers and agreeing a time when I would call, it was all open, honest and most of all fun. When we spoke on the phone we ended up chatting for about two hours, after that I knew that a date with her would not be a disaster. We met for lunch, shared a bottle of wine, had a great time than went her seperate ways, I sent her text saying that I had had lovely time and would like to meet again, she responded 5 mins later telling me the same. No wait three days bullshit, no playing hard to get, no 'he has to earn it' notions of entitlement, just up front communication.

I lost count of the number of times that I went on a dates with other women where I followed up said fun date with a call or a text saying I would like to meet again only to be totally ignored and for me to assume she is not interested. I then get some message a week later asking why I had gone silent, apparently to earn another date I had to put in a bit more effort. I didnt like to be made to jump through hoops in order to tick the box on some daft dating rules template so went on my merry way.

It really does not need to be this complicated.

I recommend "Millionaire Matchmaker"! Seriously.

Here are her rules (very easy to follow:

1. 2 drinks maximum on a date (head clear)
2. No sex before monogamy.
3. Its in his kiss (you can tell then if the attraction's real)
4. Let the man organise and decide the first dates!
5. Do not give TMI (too much information) until you know him better.

That's it!

Only the very basics of course, there's lots of other stuff to consider. Just don't make my mistakes 1,2,3, & 4 .

I would add - watch out for ATTITUDE TO WOMEN IN GENERAL, ex-relationships, porn, and generally (BIG CLUE!!!).

I never liked the Rules themselves as they were very "dead" in the water somehow. I think you can be a real person, but still have some rules.

p.s. Rules are good because we may have a conscience and love agenda but should not assume everyone else has the same agenda!

Millionaire Matchmaker is a TV programme on ITV2.

1. I forgot - no sexting until in a monogamous relationship either, otherwise you're just another 'sexy babe' (ew), not a real girlfriend.

apparently to earn another date I had to put in a bit more effort

Yes, this! If a woman wants another date, why not say so?
Surely the bloke who sees her as "too easy" for being honest, has a pretty crap attitude - an attitude that's reinforced by women who think he must beg earn their company?

The Rules only screens out men who are not that into you or who are only after an easy shag.

I'm inclined to say that, if you regard sex as a reward, you probably are playing a game. So Rules would be appropriate! (Another way to screen out men who are not that into you is to ask for what you want.)

@cuchulain...my point still holds then; you liked mrs C and she liked you ergo whatever way you played it things would have worked out, happily for all. holding back a bit for a wee while will allow for the time wasters to dissappear of their own volition...and that can't be a bad thing for people looking for a longer term and equal relationship.

Exactly kitty. The Rules would not have screened cuchain out because he made the right moves anyway.

I presume that for OD, unlike RL, someone has to make the first contact. So if it was Mrs C who did it, it is not fatal. But having done that, the Rules still apply going forward. Rules are so baseline I don't see the problem.

I know two people who were single and got married within two years of starting th rules and very happy. I think I couldn't really stick to it all myself so didn't do it but funny a lot of things worked for me that are in the 'rules'.. Like only accepting a date on a sat night. I was funny about that.. Ie if a man asked to consecutive weekday dates I was sceptical. Keeping busy, ending the phone call first. Not telling them too much (well I chat away so this wasn't for me) I think a lot of it is nix old ash ironed advice. Not sleeping together etc. like a lot of thins.. Read, take wat you need and then take ip the rest with a pinch of salt. Enjoyed the book though.

Can't get used to this... Old fashioned

OP, answering your post on the first page, yes. I agree about structure that the rules give and they do give you a 'talking to' when you start being anxious, I did try thenm in RL and they do help - not to find the right man so much but at least to weed out the wrong ones, and generally to keep being positive.

But I think it's impossible, at least afa I'm concerned, to do this online. You have to be evasive - what you told him was evasive, fine if he didn't press it woth that, but you can't also brush all the questions they usually bombard you with - and in a way understandably so as the whole thing is based on deciding QUICKLY whether to meet and whether to spend time on anyone. They often ask which area of towmn yo ulive in, where you work roughly, your first name - I'm always paranoid as my name is a bot unusual but equally saying that 'I can't tell you yety' sounds very mistrustful...

The nature of the beast is that there are LOTS of people on site and you can't meet all of those whose photo looks ok andthat's it. I myself end up asking questions as I really don't like blind dates, so try to meet only minimal nummber of men otherwise it gets overwhelming and quite depressing tbh to sit through meeting with people you don't even find slightly attractive.

I mean, if you are genuinely new, it's easy to avoid question about te dates, but what if i'm not so new to it, do I lie that i'm new, or do I just ignore the question, or lie about the number. I don't lie as it's not many but people who've been on lots of dates may feel like keeping quiet. It's a minefield!

Mind you, if you found the right 'flow' and attitude, do update us, it would be bice to learn some more regarding how to do it! When do yo uexpect then to call by the way, after a first date? surely timeframes are much shorter than in rl? Also, what is it about 4 messages - yes, but how long?? I think the OD rules can't possibly be so prescriptive.

Dahlen, ah ok! hmm, not sure whether people with slightly messy lives, or unconfident ones. would do better without the Rules - the rules are sensible and protective, and only people who are very together and know exactly what they want wouldn't need them (lots of self control , unerring judgement), but the rest of us kind of need some boundaries to set and often have no clue or just no discipline - so the rules help. BUT because they made them so strict and extreme, people just give up and then feel blad about being weak, so the rules are hardly some cure-all. Still, on balance I think better the rules, than a completely impulsive behaviour with men from naive/unconfident women, of which there are many, after divorces especially.

CuChullain, initiating e-mailing on OD is surely exempt from the 'no-no' behaviour', I'm sure the book doesn't advise not to do it - otherwise the person may never even come across your profile. But after she's done that, all the moves were done by you and she responded - yes, quickly, but she did respond. They do actually advise to be enthusiastic so if your other dates were too aloof and showed displeasure it's not 'the rules' . They just don't allow to lead, to start with, until a man is 'in love' .
Agree that if people are a true good match, they don't have to be that picky about following every rule, time frames etc., and I'm sure if she hasn't responded in 5 min but in a day, you'd not lose interest? or even if she didn't respond at all, surely after getting on like a house on fire you'd at least check whether she's got your message! But if she really took the lead, you might have slowed down a bit with your enthusiasm, that's what they claim, i.e. her keeness and taking the lead could have raised questions whether she's desperate for a partner generally, and so on.

The danger with a woman sounding eager and initiating all the moves even though the man is lukewarm and indifferent is he would start to think she was up for it, even though she was just showing sincere enthusiasm.

That is a mismatch in expectations. Under the rules regime, that would not happen. Without the rules, she would just be wasting her time when she could have been seeing others.

beagles and blueshoes yes, that's the point of the Rules for me - to help me weed out those who are passing the time/looking for an easy shag/players/those who don't seem to like women very much but enjoy the chase.

WRT to being evasive, of course I've given information, just not stuff which I regard as personal and private i.e. how many dates I've had so far because it's personal and why on earth should that be of interest to a potential date unless they have negative assumptions about women who've had lots of dates? This happened to me actually. Bloke on last date I went on asked me how long I'd been on another site. I told him "on and off" for a while. His immediate judgment? "You must be desperate". Date over.

But to put more context around this issue - The Rules were written in 1995 - times have moved on. The online Rules take this into account but the basic principles are the same, how to catch a bloke and get him to propose, use 'feminine wiles' to drive him crazy with longing etc etc. All very 1950's in my view. That's not why I turned to them. My natural inclination is to be completely upfront and honest but the reality is it just doesn't work to do that in OD where some editing is essential to avoid giving too much too soon, not just to the 'wrong' blokes but to any bloke.

I take those points other posters have made about the genuine ones who might need a bit of encouragement to ask a woman on a date - and therein lies the tension for many women, I think.

Another thought about Mr and Mrs C.

It's my view that EVERYONE follows some relationship 'script' or other, mostly non-consciously but it's there nonetheless. Mr and Mrs C may have had similar scripts and bingo! There was a fit.

Personally I needed to change mine because it simply doesn't work in OD. But I needed some guidance and The Rules gave me some insights, and that's it really. These, plus posters here who've added their own thoughts and experiences are very helpful, and thank you. I've had confirmation that The Rules as written by the authors are just too arbitrary, to rigid, highly manipulative and they don't all fit with me. However, I do feel validated in the changes I want to make in my behaviour in OD.

As a footnote - guy who asked me if I wanted to go for coffee and I said yes. Told him I am busy for next few days (true) as is he (I have no idea) . He's been texting me in a chatty way but no more mention of said coffee date. So by Tuesday when we're both 'not as busy' and if no mention is made by him I shall raise it. If he stalls, I shall move on. No more contact and no harm done.

Wisey ? I just read (and re-read) both the books like they are Talmud, truthfully. Not sure who asked but the Not Your Mother?s Rules (latest one) has a lot of information/guidance on texting, complete with a handy dandy text-back time chart.
Beagles I also am very evasive about what I share online ? not my last name and very often not where I live. I date Jewish men only, and even though NYC is full of Jewish people, the community can sometimes feel (and is) very small! I find that being playful is a good response ? i.e. someone asks so where do you live? And I say oooh top secret! Or you?ll need higher clearance for that information with a smiley wink. As for ?how are you finding OLD?? my stock answer is ?so far so good!? and then changing the subject.

@ beaglesaresweet

Sorry, have only just read your post!

CuChullain, initiating e-mailing on OD is surely exempt from the 'no-no' behaviour', I'm sure the book doesn't advise not to do it - otherwise the person may never even come across your profile.

I have not read 'the rules', but I have certainly had plenty of discussions with my female friends and office colleagues on the topic of dating etiquette and there seemed to be general acceptance that women don?t make the first move, be it online dating or in RL. To me this was an utterly insane position to take and must surely place huge limits on the chances of you finding a partner. Yes, there are some misogynistic dinosaur blokes out there who think that a women asking a guy out somehow makes her unattractive but most blokes I know would find it a breath of fresh air.

But after she's done that, all the moves were done by you and she responded - yes, quickly, but she did respond. They do actually advise to be enthusiastic so if your other dates were too aloof and showed displeasure it's not 'the rules' . They just don't allow to lead, to start with, until a man is 'in love' .

I disagree, I dont think anyone took a lead as such, the courtship just flowed, she was the one who initiated contact and suggested chatting on msn and I was the one a week later who suggested chatting on the phone, by that stage we knew we were going to meet for a date and given that we were getting on well a phone call was the next logical step, if I had not suggested it she would of.

With regards to the other women I obviously can?t confirm for certain they were following 'the rules' but my suspicions were that they were certainly following some kind of template that advised them to ?wait a while? before responding. Apparently being keen is a bad thing. To me initially, it was just a sign that despite seemingly having a good time during our first date they had gone home to have a think and elected not to take things further. When I received emails in a slightly put out tone several days later expressing disappointment that I had not chased them up beyond my initial second date invite I was left scratching my head thinking ?why the fuck did you not just get back to me saying yes a second date would be lovely? instead if fannying around. Personally I can?t stand games, I think they are a bit disrespectful and even patronising and any suspicion on my part that said women were playing them was an instant turn off. Why would you want to make someone beg when there is clearly mutual attraction. Maybe I was cutting off my nose to spite my face but generally I prefer it if women had the confidence to act on their feelings rather endanger the whole process by acting deliberately disinterested because of what some book says or dating advice in a glossy magazine.

Agree that if people are a true good match, they don't have to be that picky about following every rule, time frames etc., and I'm sure if she hasn't responded in 5 min but in a day, you'd not lose interest? or even if she didn't respond at all, surely after getting on like a house on fire you'd at least check whether she's got your message! But if she really took the lead, you might have slowed down a bit with your enthusiasm, that's what they claim, i.e. her keeness and taking the lead could have raised questions whether she's desperate for a partner generally, and so on.

You seem to be over analysing things, I would not have expected a response within 5 mins, but I would think it polite to get back within 24 hours barring some emergency or disaster. Even if she did get back within 5 mins I would not have thought any more of less of her for being keen, I would have been thankful for her clarifying her position rather than leaving me guessing by trying to play it cool or stringing me along. Generally I would follow up a ?successful? date with a nice follow up text saying I had a nice time and would like to meet again. If I heard nothing back after a few days I would conclude she was not interested and move on. Additionally, if in the phenomenally unlikely event that she did not receive my text what is stopping her from sending one herself if she was keen to meet up again or do ?the rules? prevent her from doing that? I am still of the school of thought that some of 'the rules' add more confusion to proceedings than they solve!

Thank you lady I don't know if that's the one I've bought or not, will check my kindle.

Wisey, what do the updated Rules say about females initiating contact with males in OD?

@blueshoes

Go on, be brave, drop the man an email!!!!

Cu, I won't be doing that as I am married. I only know the traditional Rules but am interested in how the Rules have been adapted for online dating.

@ blueshoes

Opps!!!!

Personally I think 'The Rules' (tm) for online dating should be:

Oh wow, what an interesting and witty profile, he is pretty cute too and lives in the same part of town as me, I think I shall drop him a line and introduce myself.

The Rules say categorically NEVER initiate online contact with men - never, don't even answer their ads, don't send cute 'smiley' messages after the first, second or even third date. Wait 24 hours after they message you before replying and keep it short.

So I've been applying the Rules since my first post. Whatever your opinion of this way of managing dating behaviour tbh I feel totally in control, I'm not anxious and over analysing every message, wondering if someone is going to ask me out or not??.because the Rules address all those frustrating and time wasting activities.

I'm online about 10 minutes to pick up messages and to view profiles of men who've messaged me. That's it. Somehow this change in my OD behaviour seems to be attracting MORE not less attention.