Laura: You know that old advice, "If someone likes you, you'll know"? Sophia: Oh, I know it well. It’s the gold standard of dating wisdom, right? Clarity is kindness. Laura: It’s also, in many cases, a complete lie. Sometimes, the more confused you are by someone, the more invested they actually want you to be. The mixed signals aren't a bug in the system; they're the main feature of a very specific, and very draining, type of relationship. Sophia: Whoa. Okay, that feels uncomfortably true. You’re saying the confusion is the point? That’s a wild thought. What are we diving into today that’s turning my dating wisdom upside down? Laura: We are diving into the deep, murky, but ultimately illuminating waters of Natalie Lue’s book, Mr Unavailable and the Fallback Girl. Sophia: I love that title. It’s so blunt. Laura: It is. And what’s incredible is that Lue started her famous blog, Baggage Reclaim, and wrote this book after her own decade-long struggle with these exact dynamics. It all came to a head with a full-blown panic attack she had during a date with a married man. Sophia: Oh wow. So this isn't just theory; it's forged in fire. That makes the advice feel so much more earned. It’s not an academic exercise; it’s a survival guide written by someone who made it out. Laura: Exactly. It was a personal crisis that launched a global conversation. And it starts with understanding the playbook of the man in the title. Lue gives this guy a name: Mr. Unavailable. And he’s not just some random jerk; he's a master of a very specific set of tactics designed to keep you hooked, but never truly held.

Sophia: Okay, so what’s in this playbook? Because I think a lot of us have read a page or two from it, even if we didn't know it was a whole book. Laura: The cornerstone move is what Lue calls "blowing hot and cold." It’s the classic push-pull. One week, he's showering you with attention, making you feel like the most important person in the world. The next, he's distant, vague, and barely responsive. Sophia: Right, the emotional whiplash. But why does that even work? It sounds so obviously manipulative, yet it's so incredibly effective at making you obsessed. Laura: Lue uses a brilliant analogy: The Hot and Cold Tap. The first time you experience the "hot" phase, it feels intense and amazing. So when the temperature drops to lukewarm or even ice cold, the change is jarring. Your brain immediately goes into problem-solving mode: "What did I do wrong? How do I get the heat back?" You start lowering your expectations, becoming grateful for even a tiny trickle of warmth. He’s not just managing his effort; he's actively managing your expectations downward. Sophia: That is chillingly accurate. You become so focused on getting back to that initial "hot" phase that you don't realize the baseline temperature is now freezing. Laura: Precisely. And when he does reappear after a cold phase, he uses another key tactic: The "Reset Button." He just waltzes back in, acting as if nothing happened. He expects to pick up right where he left off, from a convenient point in the past that erases any of his bad behavior. Sophia: And you're so relieved to have him back that you go along with it. You don't want to rock the boat by bringing up the fact that he ghosted you for two weeks. Laura: Exactly. You accept the "Relationship Amnesia." And this is where it gets really insidious. The book gives this devastating example, a story we can call the "Funeral Fiasco." A woman named Sarah had been seeing a guy, Mark, for about six months. It was a classic hot-and-cold situation. Then, Sarah's grandmother passes away. Sophia: Oh, a real moment of vulnerability. A true test of a partner. Laura: You'd think. Mark steps up in a huge way. He goes to the funeral with her, holds her hand, comforts her family, and acts like the perfect, supportive boyfriend. Sarah is overwhelmed with hope. She thinks, "This is it. This is the moment he's showing his true, committed self." Sophia: I can feel the hope. You’d think that an event like that would solidify things. Laura: But within days of the funeral, Mark vanishes. He becomes more distant than ever. He stops returning calls, and when she finally gets ahold of him, he's evasive. Sarah is just shattered. Sophia: What on earth? Why would he do that? Laura: Lue's analysis is that Mark's performance at the funeral wasn't a sign of commitment; it was a preemptive strike against it. He acted the part so perfectly during a high-stakes event because he feared it would make Sarah believe they were truly a serious couple. So, to reassert control and push the relationship back down to his comfort level, he had to aggressively pull away right after. He was resetting the terms. Sophia: Wow, that's next-level manipulation. It’s like he's inoculating himself against any future expectations of commitment. It’s not just thoughtless; it’s a strategy. Laura: It's a strategy. And it's often paired with another tactic called "Future Faking." This is when he'll drop hints about a future together—"We should go to Italy next summer," or "You'd love my family"—with zero intention of following through. Sophia: Ah, the verbal IOU for a relationship. It gives you just enough hope to stick around, but it's a check that's never going to clear. Laura: It's what Lue calls "crumb rations of commitment." He gives you just enough to survive on, but never a full meal. He'll say, "I'll call you," and then... silence. The actions never, ever match the words. And the book's point is that these aren't isolated incidents of flakiness. They are a coherent, if unconscious, system designed to maintain control and keep you in a state of perpetual hope and uncertainty. Sophia: It's a system that runs on your hope. The more you hope, the more powerful his playbook becomes. Okay, so we've painted a very clear, and frankly, quite bleak picture of this guy. But this brings us to the really tough question, the one Natalie Lue forces you to ask... why do we fall for it? Why do we become the "Fallback Girl"?

Laura: And that is the absolute core of the book. It would be easy to just write a book bashing these men, but Lue turns the mirror around. Her most powerful, and as you noted, sometimes controversial argument is that the Fallback Girl is, in her own way, also emotionally unavailable. Sophia: Okay, unpack that. Because on the surface, she’s the one who wants the commitment, who is trying, who is showing up. How can she be the unavailable one? Laura: Lue says, and this is a direct quote that hits hard, "You’re attracted to and ‘comfortable’ with Mr Unavailable because you’re emotionally unavailable too." Your unavailability just looks different. It shows up as low self-esteem, as a deep-seated belief that you have to "earn" love, or that you're not worthy of a straightforward, stable relationship. Sophia: So you choose someone who can't fully commit because, on some level, you don't believe you deserve full commitment? Or maybe you're scared of it yourself? Laura: Both. You might be avoiding real intimacy by choosing someone who can't give it. It feels safer. There’s less to lose if it was never really "on the table" to begin with. You become what Lue calls an "Emotional Airbag." Sophia: An Emotional Airbag? I have a feeling I know what this is. Laura: It’s when he shares his big "sob story"—you know, the "One Time at Band Camp" story about how his ex cheated on him or his parents were cold. You hear this, and instead of seeing it as a potential red flag about his unresolved baggage, you have what the book calls a "Bingo Moment." Sophia: A Bingo Moment! As in, "Bingo! This is why he's distant! He's not unavailable; he's just wounded. I can heal him!" Laura: Precisely. You inflate your own significance in his life. You become his confidante, his healer, his emotional airbag, cushioning him from his past pain. You pour all your energy into fixing his problems, which is a very convenient way to avoid dealing with your own. You're not building a relationship; you're taking on a project. Sophia: And it feels so noble, so compassionate. But you're basically signing up for a job with no pay and terrible hours. This is where some readers get critical of the book, right? They feel it's blaming the woman for being compassionate. Laura: It's a fair critique to raise, and the book has been called out for what some see as gender essentialism. But I think Lue’s intent is to show that it’s about taking back power, not taking on blame. She’s not saying you’re a bad person for being compassionate. She’s saying, "Examine why you are applying that compassion to a situation that is actively hurting you." Are you trying to prove your worth by fixing someone who has shown you they don't want to be fixed? Sophia: That’s a powerful distinction. It’s not about not being kind; it’s about not setting yourself on fire to keep someone else warm. So, what's the escape plan? If you recognize yourself in this, what's the first thing you actually do? Laura: The first step is to stop the flow of information and emotional investment. This is where the famous "No Contact Rule" comes in. And Lue is militant about this. No contact means no contact. No calls, no texts, no checking his social media, no asking mutual friends how he's doing. Sophia: That sounds so hard, especially when you're craving that validation. What does 'No Contact' look like in the age of social media, where you can accidentally see their life with a single swipe? Laura: It means block, mute, delete. It's about creating a sterile environment where you can detox from the hope and the drama. You have to starve the addiction to the "what if." The book argues that Mr. Unavailable operates on an open-door policy. He will continue to pop back into your life as long as you leave the door even slightly ajar. You have to be the one to slam it shut and lock it. Sophia: And what happens when you do that? When you finally close the door? Laura: You create a vacuum. And in that empty space, you're forced to confront the one person you've been avoiding: yourself. You have to start asking what you want, what you need, outside of the context of his approval. You have to start giving yourself the validation you were trying to get from him. Sophia: So the goal of No Contact isn't just to get over him. It's to get back to yourself. Laura: Exactly. It’s about breaking the cycle of outsourcing your self-esteem. You stop being a disgruntled customer complaining about a product that was faulty from the start, and you decide to finally leave the store.

Sophia: It’s fascinating how the book presents it as a system. It's not just one person's fault. It's a toxic dance, and both partners know the steps, even if they don't know they're dancing. Laura: That's the perfect way to put it. He leads with inconsistency, and the Fallback Girl follows with over-investment. It's a self-perpetuating cycle that can go on for years, because each person's unavailability feeds the other's. Sophia: And the only way to stop the dance is for one person to walk off the floor. And since Mr. Unavailable is perfectly comfortable with the status quo, it has to be the Fallback Girl. Laura: It has to be. And the book offers this one, beautifully simple piece of advice for when you're ready to find a new dance partner. It says, from now on, your 'type' is simply... 'available.' That's it. That's the only filter that matters. Not his job, not his height, not his charm. Is he consistently, emotionally available? Sophia: That cuts through so much noise. It’s so simple but so profound. Laura: And it pairs with what Lue says is the most important thing she learned from her own journey. It’s a quote that I think everyone should have tattooed on their brain: "Good things don't feel bad." Sophia: Say that again. Laura: Good things don't feel bad. If a relationship consistently makes you feel anxious, insecure, confused, or small, it is not a good thing. It doesn't matter how great the "good" moments are. The overall feeling is your gut telling you the truth. Sophia: That’s the ultimate litmus test. It makes you wonder, what "bad" things have we been telling ourselves feel "good" just because they're familiar? Laura: And that's the question that can change everything. If this episode resonated with you, we’d love to hear your thoughts. Share your own "Bingo Moments" or your experiences with setting boundaries on our social channels. Let's continue the conversation. Sophia: Absolutely. It’s a conversation worth having. Laura: This is Aibrary, signing off.