Comments on: How to Respond to “Bare Minimum” Texting

By: Dimitris

Dimitris — Fri, 13 Sep 2024 15:00:22 +0000

Well, all this is good, but if she wanted a real communication with him, she could have just asked him for a date. If he came, he would have shown a first attention to her. In the face ti face date, he can’t hide himself. She could pay attention to his body language (which never tell lies) and how this language was in accordance with his words. Text is the most secure way of communication in hiding your true self. Even calling it is. But a real person to person date (even a video call date) can tell us everything about the person we have in front of us.
And pay attention, also, to someone ‘s acts and behavior, not the words.
The immediate ways of communication are the best.
And then, if we want to see more of him/her, we can be creative. Fix
another date, learn his/her schedule and then ask him/her for some help in a problem you have. An immediate response shows at least attention (but not necessarily intention) but it is a start.
As you said, make the modeling, become what you want to see to the other.

By: Elendipity

Elendipity — Thu, 12 Sep 2024 21:47:39 +0000

Hi Matthew,

I’ve always loved your approach on communication, and have learned so much from your firm, yet elegant way of setting a standard -aka how to still be a lady despite the circumstances. However, I have some doubts about your advice here and would like to spark an interesting conversation on the topic (don’t even know if you’re gonna read this, but it’s worth a try).

Although the girl in the video means well, I’m sorry to say I’m really rooting for the guy here. He might be giving his bare minimum, but she is being pushy, childish and a tad aggressive -totally off-putting. I’m even surprised he continued texting her.

Yes, we all know she means well. She is the type of girl I like to call “Miss Good Intentions, Lousy Execution”. (And believe me, I get her. I’ve been there). When you behave like this you become, like you have so nicely put it, “the barker” of the relationship -and even manage to make the other person look good.

Another issue I have with the response you provide is the use of “LOL” or emojis while setting a boundary. I love the way you teach us how to be warm and nice when communicating, but more often than not I’ve seen you throw in a “LOL” or a smiley face after setting a standard while texting, which to me feels kind of forced and insincere. While I’m not interested in becoming “the barker” of the relationship, I certainly wouldn’t feel like texting a “Lol” or a winky face after having been vulnerable and told you I’m kind of hurt or disappointed. It’s like setting a standard but doing it on the quiet. Why not just tell him “I love talking to you, but these short exchanges just aren’t all that rewarding.” You’re acknowledging you like talking to him, but you also told him that kind of communication is not gonna get him anywhere.

Am I missing something here, Matthew?

Would love to hear you talking about the “Miss Good Intentions, Lousy Execution” kind of gal, and offering elegant, warm and solid responses without using emojis.

By: Sharon

Sharon — Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:56:21 +0000

I have to disagree with trying and trying to change this guy. It will not happen.

Have a discussion saying you need more communication, and if that does not work, move on.

Whole exchange sounded like breadcrumbing to me. A waste of time.

By: Terry

Terry — Sun, 08 Sep 2024 13:06:53 +0000

I thought it was interesting that you said “modeling” behavior. We often hear that we should “mirror” the other persons behavior. Only invest what they invest and so on. I feel like mirroring just creates a kind of pattern of equal disinterest – a tit for tat quality. I talked to my BF about this once. I told him I was investing based on what he was investing. But it turns out, he was actually following my lead! I prefer the modeling method and it seems to be working better for us now.