.png)
I previously made a thread about my thoughts and criticisms on the book listed in the FDS handbook called "Why men love bitches" by Sherry Argov. This book basically tells women that neediness turns off men because men need to feel the chase even by the time he marries a woman. Already, the author pins the responsibility on the woman, they are the reason for their mans actions. He totally didn't pull back because of things going on with him, being busy etc, it was because of you (the reader). The book then gives strategies for when a man pulls back, such as leaving the house, not being there when he gets back, "dumb fox" strategies, not nagging, being self sufficient - basically being the strong independent bad bitch. Now don't get me wrong she makes good points sometimes, and the strategies of playing more aloof and mysterious probably does work, for a certain type of man - the avoidant man.
Society seems to glorify independence and self sufficiency, and look down on dependence and neediness. This is somewhat toxic because it 1) minimizes your need for connection with others, need to dependant on others and 2) defies the basic human trait that we all need closeness and intimacy with others.
I'll use a small anecdote that helped me realize this. I have a litter of kittens at home and my cat who is usually hostile and unfriendly cuddling these kittens as they cling to her. When she leaves they will cry and she will come back. Even towards me she has been more affectionate. Despite her hostility she depends on me for food and safety and affection. Dependency is completely normal, we come out of the womb completely dependent on our mothers (and fathers) and as we become adults we still have an adult form of that dependency. Yet this gets looked down on, and people act like its more normal to be Independent. Is it just me or is that crazy? There needs to be a healthy balance of both at the very least.
I could listen to Argov's strategies and mental gymnastics on how to regain a mans interest once he pulls back, but that would not be being true to myself, and its meeting the MAN's needs not MY needs. How is this healthy, forcing yourself to be less "needy" to your partner, pretending not to care about lack of phone calls and so on? If you do employ these strategies of being the independent woman who is always busy and barely around to pick up the phone, passing off dates to do her own thing, it will attract men with an avoidant attachment style. Would you really want that, or is it better to maybe care about your own needs and realize that when a man cannot meet those needs he is not compatible?
If you're like me, who has an anxious preoccupied attachment style (feel free to look up if you don't know the attachment system) then forcing oneself to be hyper independent is not mentally healthy. It will also attract avoidant man, who are REALLY bad for women with an anxious attachment style. Avoidant men are the ones who cheat, have commitment issues, engage in infidelity such as porn use, say you're "too sensitive". that is the type of man books like these are helping.
So my point is, never be ashamed or feel like you're asking for too much or being too needy. Always stand your ground and make sure a mans meeting your needs. It's good to have full-filling things and people in your life so you do not lose yourself in a relationship, its good to have your own life separate from a man and have alone time - but can we drop this whole cool girl nonsense? It's only going to attract the wrong type of men and damage your mental health ESPECIALLY if this avoidant type behaviour does not suit you and you need the following from a man - reassurance, quality time, commitment, empathy and intimacy.
I think there’s a nuance here that you might want to consider. I see your point, but you need to understand that if you would like a relationship at some point, yet avoidant or anxious men won’t be able to provide for your needs (or anyones really!) the only men left are the securely attached ones. But the thing about securely attached men is that they want partners who are *also* securely attached. Being around someone who can’t validate themselves and NEED someone else around then to feel happy can be draining for the secure partner. There’s a difference between basic independence and hyperindependence, the former is based off of self-love and a sense of self-worth that isn’t based in relationships, the latter is rooted in excessive defensiveness, even in the presence of a high-value, low-risk relationship. I used to think that I could normalize my anxious attachment, but I realized that it would ultimately create a life for me where I was constantly at the mercy of someone else telling me that I was special in order to feel valid, which means that I’d suffer a lot from their rejection. Knowing what your needs are and expecting those standards from a man isn’t mutually exclusive to a normal amount of independence from you. You can expect him to care for you, but until you can 100% care for yourself, you increase the likelihood of needing him as a validation pipeline, which could end badly.
I really hate that title alone. "Why men love-" being male identified isn't getting tou anywhere. "-Bitches" having self respect means you're a bitch. Bitch isn't a word the general female population with self worth would want to claim.
I see your point, playing the cool girl is a recipe for failure bc it's not genuine. And playing games of any kind inhibits a genuine connection from forming. I think instead of playing a man back, dropping him and moving tf on is significantly better- and you can use all those methods to move in rather than to win him back. Like I agree w her suggested course of action I just don't agree w her why/reason. But take what fits and leave what doesn't. And the dumb fox is 🥇 BUT I don't think it makes you more appealing to avoidant men. Avoidant men still like having a woman at their beck and call, and anxious (or even secure women who are driven to anxious attachment) are appealing to avoidant men more than an avoidant woman. Like I'm pretty secure in my style even if I'm not overly expressive all the time- and I've still been driven to an anxious wreck by an avoidant man. Don't think that you're safe from an avoidant man targeting you is all I'm staying
I haven't finished the book yet, but what I have read so far I am understanding a little differently than you, it seems. For me it's more about calmly demonstrating my expectation of being treated with respect. An example; a family member has had a tendency to not respect me or my time as much as I think would be proper. At one point, they last-minute invited me to a celebration (the evening before, the celebration would be in the morning). I responded "Thank you for the invitation. Unfortunately, with it being so close to the celebration day, I have made other arrangements already. I wish you a happy celebration!" I did not join them the next morning. They got the point. If they want me to join, they need to show more respect for my time. The next time, they made arrangements with me earlier, and treated me very well. We all had a nice time, and enjoyed our time together.
The point isn't to reward avoidant attachment; the point is to demonstrate that your time has value, and that others need to show respect if they want your attention/presence.
Obviously, if a man is being flaky and avoiding you and such, it's not a great way to start a relationship. I think we can all agree on that.
PS. The dumb fox has been very valuable to me!
Update: I am currently reading another FDS approved book called "Attached" By Levine and Heller, which partly inspired this thread. The chapter on effective communication directly contradicts Argov's strategy that I have critiqued. Argov (author of Why men love bitches) claims that if a man is calling you later than you want him to, to not answer the call to show him that he must call earlier. The book Attached says this was one of the examples of Ineffective communication, and effective communication would be directly confronting the partner about how not calling makes them feel and what you would rather have them do (without blaming, generalising or accusing the partner). Choosing not to pick up the call (Argov says go out with your girlfriends or something rather than be at home waiting for the call) would be this books example of a Protest Behaviour. In fact, the entire strategies of Why men love bitches is just protest behaviours. What is that exactly? An action that tries to re-establish connection with a partner or get their attention. Spamming texts and calls would also be a protest behaviour, but so is withdrawing. These behaviours are unhealthy at best and toxic at the worst. This is exactly why I had a bad feeling while reading Argov's book, despite her making many confidence inspiring points. It makes me wonder why FDS has both these books recommended.
I read the book awhile ago, and I agree with some of your criticisms. I agree with a lot of the book, but at the same time the book seems to insist you had to play games IN ORDER TO deal with the misogynistic ideas these guys have about women who are "nice". Like, it's kinda messed up we have to STOP being nice, dependent in order to get a guy to notice - the way I treat my friends is a turn off to men, or a misread invitation to date. (ex: gifts, making food, emotional support). The book is quite dated and some of the advice they give with the petty games, doesn't fall in line with FDS thinking. If he's doing LV stuff, you'd just leave him. You may want to give a final warning (depending on circumstance), but generally we're not in the biz of being Bob the builder or training a guy to be a partner. Or waiting on a guy who doesn't have the balls to ask a woman out (ch. where the guys admit on not making a move on purpose as a shit test) But even in the book, says this. That some men "don't have the equipment to be a partner" and advises to walk away. So, I assume Argov is implying, yea, do what I say in the book, but also you can walk away - just don't get too committed in the beginning because he may just have a mask on. Some of the stuff in there is sexist thinking, ex: the chapter where the guys talk about their opinions on women, what's a turn on and what's not. Some of those statements are LV anyways. "I like to start shit with my woman and she puts me in her place cuz she's spicy" Ok dude, how about we don't argue to begin with? I will say I think some of those "weird-men-thought-patterns" is true. (ch: where a woman goes to a tupperware party vs his vacation date). When I was with my ex and was making plans to move out of the apartment, and he dumped me months earlier, I was having a moment with my dog, I'm just talking to me and cuddling my dog, and he got emotional and begged for me back because he got jealous of MY DOG in that moment. So, I see merit in trying to be somewhat unavailable, everyone has shit to do, but don't do this every time. Finally, I agree that independence is glorified a lot. To the point it's shameful to NOT be independent. Which I think is fucked up in certain ways. Because we need each other more than ever in these times. I myself have been independent and on my own for some time, but from time to time I really wish I had someone to rely on, someone to come home to, someone to share my corny jokes with. I am independent because I have no choice. I don't have the best family, and very few friends I can count on. I have hobby groups, but not everyone is HV. There is no room for me to be needy. I can't chase men unless I want to be humiliated. I can't be open with what I feel, initially, or else I will get taken advantaged of. My hot take is I think Pick Mes, at least the ones that don't endanger other women, just want love and acceptance like everything else, even if their methods are shameful and lose face. I am really worried for society as I feel there are ever more divides between every group of people to the point we have to make a whole ass book(s) about not getting screwed over in dating and other relationships. As much as we need to look out for Red Flags, why aren't we have conversations about How to Learn to Love(because love is a skill in itself), and how to practice skills that benefit community growth...
*slow clap increasing in tempo then standing ovation* this is a great post. The part about the avoidant men who engage in infidelity and say you are “too sensitive“ was scarily spot on. I must be preoccupied anxious attached as well! Thanks OP. Xoxo